Party Poker ends relationship with skins

[pokeraddict]

Party Poker has made what many believe is a suicidal move. They have kicked all of the skins off their network. The skins Multi Poker, Intertops, Empire and Eurobet are all now on their own network. Party Poker kicked off 30% of their players that they made 50%+ of their rake. Currently players are not even able to cash out of Eurobet's poker cashier, this money essentially locked.

IMO rooms/networks like Poker Stars, Ultimate Bet, Absolute, Prima and Crpytos have to be jumping for joy. Many players will never trust Party Poker again after this. One can only assume this was done to try and save their stock price, one that is sure to be punished in the short term since they have now lost #1 status. Expect Empire and Party stock prices to tank (especially Empire's) and expect any other major room to have a major influx of players, especially rakeback rooms.

Much of this is my opinion but noone can deny this crazy decision will send ripple for time to come and how much this benefits other poker rooms.

 

[players]

Where did you get this news from.

 

[largeeyes]

Party had a press release stating this.

 

[spearmaster]

I agree with PokerAddict.

Personally, I am highly disappointed in the moves they have made since floating, not least because I lost a bet with Simmo But I expected that they would go on to bigger and better things - and instead they have done exactly the opposite, with at least two ill-advised moves which could have been averted with proper advice.

The upside of this is that their stock will soon be available at bargain prices. The downside is obviously for people who bought in early - me, I got lucky because I couldn't find a way to buy stock!

Empire, however, is not a stock I think I would ever have recommended - and now they will almost surely go on a tailspin.

 

[amandajm]

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

 

[buck]

Party Poker "silly move"

Reading the press release they appear to want to introduce other gambling to PP users, such as BJ etc. One of the reasons to play PP is the vast amount of users that are on line at one time, which will surely go downhill. If I want to play BJ whilst playing poker I would go to other sites that currently have this "feature"

This will open the other networks up to calim the #1 site.



Buck

 

[jetset]

I spoke to their Director of communications John Shepherd yesterday about this release and he says it is part of their long term strategic plan to create one big gaming site where their legions of players can use a common account and play casino, poker or even mobile games under optimum conditions and customer support, using the latest technology. This has apparently been announced on several occasions and the skins were in the picture. They're looking to launch this super-site early next year and their customer service infrastructure is already being beefed up.

The skins have been given additional features and will continue to operate on the original platform (see the release) It will be interesting to see if there are any statements from them in this regard.

 

[jetset]

Empire shares dip as investors fold on poker

Investors in internet poker were scared away from the sector on Monday despite strong third quarter revenue results from Empire Online as PartyGaming, the market leader said that it would take its customers away from the system of pooled poker players that has provided liquidity for all companies.

Empires results were overshadowed as Noam Lanir, chief executive, said that there was little growth in the sector during the period and Empires shares slumped 24 per cent to 139p.

 

[Simmo!]

Market Reaction:

Outdated URL (Invalid)

 

[mary]

I read the press put out by analysts on the financial side of things, and I'm not sure that all the money people understand how skins and online gaming work. I think they may have been double-counting players and are in for a bit of a shock.

I just read yesteday of a survey in the UK that had the result that 93% (!) of the respondents had gambled online. That looks like market saturation right there, there may not be much room for growth in the UK market.

I can see why Party would want to market the casinos side to their poker base, casino customers are 8X more profitable per head than poker customers. Why let those players go play on Playtech or Microgaming sites? I haven't looked at Iglobalmedia's casino software in years, is it any good with respect to interface and game selection?

Note to studio audience: Mary will never play at an Iglobalmedia site. They ripped off casino players for years without apology with gaffed games and that's how they funded their poker side. They did not see anything wrong with that; the distinction being that they considered their casino games to be fair because they were random. I consider them to be a scam because they did not follow the math of the casino games they protrayed--they were essentially slot machines looking like table games such as roulette. They made no disclosure at any time to players that this was the case.

 

[buck]

Party poker

Hi,

Played PP multi table torunament last night. I thought the number of players on line was about the same as I always see.

I did play BJ and the graphics and game was about the same as Starluck. (various known problems exist with that.) Not quit as nice as some of the other sites. But I would rather not have games with negative expectations on the poker sites.


Buck

 

[pokeraddict]

But I would rather not have games with negative expectations on the poker sites.

It is step one in destroying the quality of the games IMO. Party acts like they are the only game in town, Paradise Poker thought that too. Now they are #8-10 instead of #1 like they were 4-5 years ago.

 

[mary]

Let's be a little bit more explicit about this: having negative expectation games may alienate poker players because those games are sucking money out of the fish, yes? Poker players will accept rake, but they want to see a lot of other players with money to contribute to the Greater Good.

After all, it is the fattest, tastiest fishies who will be lured into the clutches of Three Card Poker...

 

[pokeraddict]

Let's be a little bit more explicit about this: having negative expectation games may alienate poker players because those games are sucking money out of the fish, yes? Poker players will accept rake, but they want to see a lot of other players with money to contribute to the Greater Good.

After all, it is the fattest, tastiest fishies who will be lured into the clutches of Three Card Poker...

EXACTLY! Now over a period of time the fish will get sick of getting beat up by this blackjack or who knows, maybe just play it exclusively. Slowly the quality of games gets lower and lower. People are acting like the sky is falling but there are many other places that have good quality games, you just have to look a bit harder.

 

[Freudian]

Let's be a little bit more explicit about this: having negative expectation games may alienate poker players because those games are sucking money out of the fish, yes? Poker players will accept rake, but they want to see a lot of other players with money to contribute to the Greater Good.

After all, it is the fattest, tastiest fishies who will be lured into the clutches of Three Card Poker...

I have left the network now and that has zero to do with blackjack. I could care less. Once Party offers rakeback again I'll be back. And I know a tonne of high volume players doing the same thing.

Since 10% of players make for 70% of the rake, Party will catch on pretty fast. It is happening as I type this, in fact.

 

[solring]

Since 10% of players make for 70% of the rake, Party will catch on pretty fast. It is happening as I type this, in fact.

Party was back up to 70,000+ players again last night.

 

[mary]

For investment comparison purposes, it's hard to know how many of those 70k players are actually individual customers. Could be 4,000 "ten-tablers" and 30k individual players for a total of 34k individuals!

The market would like to see poker players converted into casino players. Party can't point to that 70k figure and say, "look! 70k potential casino players! Get excited and buy stock!"

"Ten tablers" are very unlikley to become good casino customers.

 

[buck]

PP number of pllayers

So if I play BJ whilst I am playing at a poker table will they count me as 2 players on line?

Just wondering.

Buck

 

[pokeraddict]

So if I play BJ whilst I am playing at a poker table will they count me as 2 players on line?

Just wondering.

Buck

Yes every seat taken is a player counted regardless of whether they are a unique account or not. Play money players also are included.

 

[Lord_Have_Mercy]

Well I closed my account at Party Poker. I deposited $300 todays in a row. I got it both time to around $550 mark. Only to lose it all playing their BJ. Even when I take a beat at the poker table. I tried to get it back playing BJ.

 

[paul1]

Once upon a time, in Los Angeles, there was only draw poker, high and lowball. The fishiest games were lowball. That's where the action players played. When they introduced/legalized Pai Gow Poker, the whole LA scene changed. Action players switched to Pai Gow. Also, frequently when the livest players would get stuck bad in the regular poker games, they would leave their seats and wander over to the Pai Gow section trying to get even. It changed the whole scene.

 

[schnozzy]

For investment comparison purposes, it's hard to know how many of those 70k players are actually individual customers. Could be 4,000 "ten-tablers" and 30k individual players for a total of 34k individuals!

PartyPoker has stated that they get 70% of their rake/fees from 10% of their players.

Played PP multi table torunament last night. I thought the number of players on line was about the same as I always see.

The multi-table tournaments were never shared between skins. Only the cash games were shared, and those are near dead on the other sites, despite enormous bonus offers.

Party has also been making personalized kickback offers to high-volume players. I was offered $1500/mo if I matched the level of play I had there, before I got fed up with their customer service and switched to PokerStars.

 

[spearmaster]

Once upon a time, in Los Angeles, there was only draw poker, high and lowball. The fishiest games were lowball. That's where the action players played. When they introduced/legalized Pai Gow Poker, the whole LA scene changed. Action players switched to Pai Gow. Also, frequently when the livest players would get stuck bad in the regular poker games, they would leave their seats and wander over to the Pai Gow section trying to get even. It changed the whole scene.

I wouldn't go so far as to call the games fishy. I used to play lowball in Gardena - hit three jackpots in a month, only playing a few hours a week.

I also played in one of the first Pai Gow poker tournaments ever held (at the Bicycle, and actually I think it was the first one) - and won.

I miss that whole scene - and I really miss playing Lowball. Your description of the "scene" is pretty damn accurate

 

[paul1]

I miss that whole scene - and I really miss playing Lowball. Your description of the "scene" is pretty damn accurate

There's still a small amount of lowball in the state. A couple places in LA (Gardena and Commerce), a couple near Sacramento, and, of course, over at the Oaks in Emeryville.

I'm sure you've probably heard the old joke. What do they call a 70-year old lowball player? ...... "Junior".

 

[pokeraddict]

Completely OT......

Is Stud H/L still around out there? I could not find any in LV except the WSOP tourneys.

 

[paul1]

Completely OT......

Is Stud H/L still around out there? I could not find any in LV except the WSOP tourneys.

I can't think of any. It was never my interest, however. Before 1987, the whole state of California was all forms of draw poker. And there were some 600 small cardrooms throughout the state. Seems like every town had one. Now I believe there are about 80, not counting the Indian casinos. I'd say that high draw is totally extinct, and as can be seen lowball is on its death bed.

Not hard to figure out why. Of course, the popularity of holdem is the biggest factor. But there's no incentive for a cardroom to spread draw or lowball. The collection was about $24 per hour from the whole table of 8 players. In the smallest holdem games they rake close to $100 an hour.

 

[solring]

And there were some 600 small cardrooms throughout the state. Seems like every town had one. Now I believe there are about 80, not counting the Indian casinos.

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) lists 138 different cardrooms.

I'm proud to say that I've played at 15 of them...

 

[paul1]

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) lists 138 different cardrooms.

I'm proud to say that I've played at 15 of them...

I clicked that link and I think that is a pretty up-to-date list, off the top of my head. Many of those are Indian casinos and I suspect that if you deduct those it will be close to what I said for small card rooms. There are maybe four or five on that list I would question, which is pretty good because most lists I've seen are way outdated. But that's a pretty good list.

I think the difference is that somehow the state started regulating them in the late 80s, and before that it was generally up to the local governments, so you had literally close to 600 cardrooms here once. That was the good old days. But many "rooms" were just one table in a bar. And many were in some pretty rough parts of towns, not a place where you'd take your wife or girlfriend. Not exactly the Bellagio.

 

[dominique]

I read the press put out by analysts on the financial side of things, and I'm not sure that all the money people understand how skins and online gaming work. I think they may have been double-counting players and are in for a bit of a shock.

I just read yesteday of a survey in the UK that had the result that 93% (!) of the respondents had gambled online. That looks like market saturation right there, there may not be much room for growth in the UK market.

I can see why Party would want to market the casinos side to their poker base, casino customers are 8X more profitable per head than poker customers. Why let those players go play on Playtech or Microgaming sites? I haven't looked at Iglobalmedia's casino software in years, is it any good with respect to interface and game selection?

Note to studio audience: Mary will never play at an Iglobalmedia site. They ripped off casino players for years without apology with gaffed games and that's how they funded their poker side. They did not see anything wrong with that; the distinction being that they considered their casino games to be fair because they were random. I consider them to be a scam because they did not follow the math of the casino games they protrayed--they were essentially slot machines looking like table games such as roulette. They made no disclosure at any time to players that this was the case.

Iglobal, now Party Gaming, will release a new casino with lots of new games etc. I think in February. The entire company product is going to change dramatically. This move by Party Poker was only one small part of the puzzle.

 

[kavaman]

Yep, but who the heck would like to play casino games at the same time as playing poker . Answer:The fishies

So it will mean less money for better players... because the fishies play their money to casino games..

-kavaman

 

[buck]

interesting twist PP to buy empire

News article from

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Annorax]

Note to studio audience: Mary will never play at an Iglobalmedia site. They ripped off casino players for years without apology with gaffed games and that's how they funded their poker side. They did not see anything wrong with that; the distinction being that they considered their casino games to be fair because they were random. I consider them to be a scam because they did not follow the math of the casino games they protrayed--they were essentially slot machines looking like table games such as roulette. They made no disclosure at any time to players that this was the case.

Note to news anchor: Evidence of gaffed games? I suspect Party's new blackjack may be gaffed, but don't have nearly a big enough sample size to prove it.

 

[sirius]

Note to news anchor: Evidence of gaffed games? I suspect Party's new blackjack may be gaffed, but don't have nearly a big enough sample size to prove it.

They were definitely rigged around 1999-2001 at least. I had a result at Starluck that was in the millions to one chance I think (5 SDs below average) and they definitely knew it was rigged and wouldn't send the log files (they sent them for planetluck but that result wasn't so obviously bad). When wizardofodds didn't control his own advertising he advertised one of the iglobal sites and he recieved complaints and concluded it was rigged after testing it himself.

He used to have a warning on his site about iglobal/partygaming sites on his blacklist but that mysteriously disappeared a few months ago!

 

[dominique]

The software was changed quite some time ago, after the problems surfaced.

I think Michael removed the warnings after he got around to retesting.

I do play slots there - I like some of the features a lot.

 

[paul1]

They were definitely rigged around 1999-2001 at least. I had a result at Starluck that was in the millions to one chance I think (5 SDs below average) and they definitely knew it was rigged and wouldn't send the log files (they sent them for planetluck but that result wasn't so obviously bad). When wizardofodds didn't control his own advertising he advertised one of the iglobal sites and he recieved complaints and concluded it was rigged after testing it himself.

He used to have a warning on his site about iglobal/partygaming sites on his blacklist but that mysteriously disappeared a few months ago!

There was a thread here not too long ago (within the last year I think) that showed repeat hands in their video poker. The same exact hands within a few minutes of each other. I don't remember if the issue was ever resolved. I'd like to know what happened with that.

 

[pokeraddict]

I am 99% sure this was never resolved. Seemingly swept under the carpet.

 

[paul1]

I am 99% sure this was never resolved. Seemingly swept under the carpet.

Maybe Bryan could ask when at that convention.

I, myself, have mixed thoughts on this kind of stuff. I know when I first started playing, I was convinced that MG's blackjack was "funny" and there was nothing anyone could tell me otherwise. So I stopped playing it. But I know gamblers are generally paranoid about these things and I don't want to be like that. Now I read what Sirius just said about IGlobal's blackjack, and I respect Sirius's opinion. I'm really confused. I just would not expect the big names in the industry to do anything not on the square. I just don't get it. I just, don't, get it.

Oh, and I must have missed what was at Wizardofodds on that subject. Gee, I would have liked to have read that.

 

[amandajm]

What the wiz had to say about igm?

Link >> Link Outdated / Removed

 

[mary]

I talked with them at an industry show. They freely admitted that their original software was not replicating the mathematical peformance of cards etc. Claimed that they hadn't known, it was the programmers' fault, and that their new software in development in India would be fair.

Of course, Starluck and Planetluck ran bonus promos all the time for games such as roulette that would have busted out the house if they'd been fair. So these guys really didn't give a ****.

They did not make any effort to refund losses to anybody; did not rollout the "fair" software immediately when they had it; and just didn't seem to really think it was of much concern.

So, I won't ever play at any Iglobalmedia games, including the poker. It's not important to them to run an honest game; only if they think they'll be caught.

 

[amandajm]

The bbc money programme just ran an

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and never bothered with the "flawed" software thing.

Of course I made the point to the BBC. I can only report your words and thoughts second hand Mary. If more did so, maybe this firm could be made answerable somehow and see fit to send the money they gleaned to charity.

 

[DsyGrl]

I am so glad that Party Poker isn't on the "accredited" list. That was my worst online experience ever. I, too, experienced some of their other sites. I would NEVER recommend to a friend! I was shocked to find out how many people that I know actually play there.

 

[The Dude]

I am so glad that Party Poker isn't on the "accredited" list. That was my worst online experience ever. I, too, experienced some of their other sites. I would NEVER recommend to a friend! I was shocked to find out how many people that I know actually play there.

I had them up there for a little while, but I'm not fully satisfied with their handling of their software issues in the casino realm. There are a number of issues in the complaints forum that linger.