Quantcast

From the category archives:

Tech Ramblings

Like what you see? How about getting Bill's Poker Blog delivered to your inbox?

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Else, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!


2432704579 9538d46671 The Online Poker Industrys Love Hate Relationship With Rakeback

There’s probably no single topic that divides the online poker industry more than rakeback [what is rakeback?].  Seriously, in many companies rakeback is a dirty word.  At one company I know it’s jokingly referred to as “The Unmentionable” by the poker staff because to even say the word rakeback generates a negative Pavlovian response within the organization.

Other sites publicly denounce rakeback but then offer promotions and/or bonuses that essentially amount to rakeback.  They might call it value, or commission, or fee but it’s still rewarding players for generating rake.

And lastly you have the rooms that use rakeback aggressively to acquire and retain players.   For them it’s a tool they use in order to compete against better-funded poker rooms that can buy up all the media in a market and shut them out of traditional marketing channels.

The affiliates are also in a similar battle over rakeback.  Traditional affiliates detest rakeback.  They spend a lot of money creating valuable content that they might not otherwise be able to produce if they had to give the lion’s share of their affiliate fees back to the players.

On the other end of the spectrum you have the rakeback affiliates who don’t mind working on slim margins because they can still make money on the sheer volume of players.  Also most rakeback affiliates don’t create expensive content (tournament coverage, actual journalists, etc) so they operate with far less overhead than the traditional affiliates.

Who are we forgetting here?  Oh yes, the players.  The players are a little less divided.  Either they know about rakeback and love it or they have no idea what it is and probably don’t even care.

Can’t we all just get along?

In reality, almost everyone has a valid argument.  The problem is that the online poker industry hasn’t really grasped the fact that one size doesn’t fit all.

A rakeback affiliate and a traditional affiliate provide two completely different types of functions.  A large poker news site is likely to have tons of content that rates highly in search engines and will attract newer players when they search for certain keywords or follow a link sent to them by a friend.  Yes, hardcore poker players also use their content but most don’t click on the affiliate links.

But the rakeback affiliate is also providing a function.  The rakeback affiliate is catering to a more sophisticated poker player.  The rakeback affiliate aggregates valuable (higher raking) players and provides them with customer support, specialized promotions (rake races, etc), and serves as a single interface for the poker room.

So on one side you have the traditional affiliate who can send a large volume of players but the traditional affiliate normally doesn’t even know who they are nor do they tend to have any sort of ongoing relationship with them.  On the other side you have the rakeback affiliate who sends fewer players but knows all of the players they send (to the degree that they have their contact info and pay them every month) and maintain an ongoing relationship with them.

Unfortunately, most poker rooms offer only one model of compensation.  Send us players and we give you a cut of the rake.

And the poker rooms are stuck in the middle.  They don’t want to anger their traditional affiliates by condoning rakeback but they don’t want to lose their best customers to competitors that do allow it.

And because there is no simple answer, poker rooms either take a hostile stance, shamelessly offer rakeback to anybody who asks, or try a middle ground that ends up being so convoluted that even David Sklansky can’t work out the math of how their system works.

So what’s the answer?

I’m not sure I have an answer.  I have some thoughts but not necessarily an answer that will work across the board.   It’s a difficult problem because you have to raise the switching cost for the players while still keeping the affiliates happy.

One of the other major problems comes out of the fact that most of the existing affiliate models originated from a different era and are outdated in today’s current landscape.  The affiliate model was devised at a time when the US was essentially the only market, rakeback was unheard of, the poker player community was rather immature and unorganized, and most sites didn’t have the capital to conduct large media campaigns.

All of those parameters have changed since the inception of affiliate programs but the poker rooms have yet to evolve.  If anything they find themselves being in the uncomfortable position of providing a commodity service.

With online poker rooms receiving anywhere from 20% - 50% of their new sign-ups from affiliates and the old 80/20 rule whereby a small percentage of affiliates send the majority of the traffic, the online poker sites really don’t have the leverage to change things on their own.

But by the same token, the traditional affiliates are going to have to come to grips with the fact that a player who they sent to XYZ Poker two years ago when he was a newbie to poker who is now 18 tabling small stakes games and raking $15,000 a month wants some of that rake back.  If the affiliate doesn’t cut him a rakeback deal then he’ll quit playing on the site and go to one where a rakeback affiliate will give him a deal.  So they can either have 5% of $15,000 or 100% of $0.

To be fair, many affiliates have seen the writing on the wall and are making just such a change to their business model.  Many of the coaching sites and educational sites require that you link up your account with them with your account on the poker room so they can track your progress and pay you out bonuses and such.  Some of those sites have either already implemented or have discussed offering incremental rakeback whereby players start off with zero rakeback and either as a function of time or MGR are offered a higher and higher percentage.

That does seem to be the model that makes the most sense as both an affiliate and the poker room spend most of their money trying to acquire players.  Once the player is in the door the longer they remain a customer the more profitable they become.

So where does that leave blogs, news sites, and everybody else who doesn’t have a one on one relationship with their players?

Well, as I mentioned, the 80/20 (probably more like 90/10 in most cases) rule is in effect when it comes to affiliates.  The overwhelming majority of affiliates simply don’t send enough players.  From a business perspective it would make sense if they ended MGR deals for any affiliate not generating X number of signups per month and then putting in some stringent rules that took any incentives out of trying to scam the room on the CPA deals.

As for the upper 10% or 20%, I think the poker rooms should just buy them out.  I know that sounds crazy but over the long run it would likely be cheaper than paying them out as affiliates.  I mean, listen, I see a lot of these affiliates around Gibraltar, Malta, and at conferences and many of them are doing quite well.  If there’s that much money in the value chain then as long as you can buy the company for a reasonable price then it’s a good investment.

Another alternative would be for the poker rooms to force a rakeback scheme on the traditional affiliates either by policy or via offering so many bonuses that went against MGR that the net effect was the same for the player and the affiliate.

I know some larger affiliates who read that might gasp a bit but as rakeback becomes more widespread within the poker world the players are going to force their hand eventually anyway.  When player attrition rates (churn) start increasing most affiliates are going to have to make a choice between making up for that by pumping more new customers through the door or conceding that they have to split some of the profits with the players.

Well, technically, there’s another option which is for the affiliates to hit the poker rooms up for a larger percentage to compensate them for the higher churn rates but sooner or later they’ll reach a point where the poker rooms can’t pay them a large enough percentage to compensate them for the churn losses.  Plus there’s the fact that the poker room will likely take note of the lifetime value of the players being sent and put their own throttle on how much they are willing to pay for similar caliber players.

Like I said earlier, there aren’t any easy answers.  The industry is maturing and like it or not rakeback will likely be here with us for awhile.  Love it or hate it players are going to increasingly demand rakeback.  It should be interesting to see how the industry responds.

photocred to adam*b

{ 8 comments }

If you have some time on your hands next week you might want to check out these rake races on Cake Poker and Full Tilt:

FullTilt Rake Race: Apr 21 - 30, $7000 Prize Pool 50 Places Paid!

Cake Poker $21,000 in cash prizes: Apr 21 - 30, $6000 Prize Pool 50 Placed Paid!

Only catch is that these are for new or existing Rakeback Report players. But if you don’t already have a rakeback account at either site . . . why not? Look for both rake races under “Races and Rolls

{ 0 comments }

40568144 fe236e3422 Some Upgrades to Bills Poker Blog

If you’re reading this via RSS or email delivery pop on over to the website and check out the redesign. Actually, it’s a bit more than a redesign as I also changed hosting providers and a ton of other things.

As you may note, I went with a professionally designed theme (i.e. it cost money) called Thesis. I know that there are a ton of free themes out there and I could have certainly coded my own should I had the time and inclination but for $164 (for the multiple blog option – only $87 for the single blog version) I got a well thought out and very easy to administrate theme. From a time vs. cost perspective, it was an easy choice as even the free themes often require a lot of customization and if you want two columns instead of three then you’re in the code mucking around anyway. And then if WordPress releases an update that breaks the theme you can’t just download the newest version of the theme and install it because you have to go back in and put all of your hacks into the new theme.

Thesis operates on a completely different philosophy. You can configure the hell out of it via the control panel. You can change it from a 2 to 3 column layout with a click of a button. You can change column widths, add widgets, and make all sorts of changes all without touching a line of code.

Better yet, when you do touch code you don’t touch the theme code. All of your customizations go into special files which Thesis reads and then gives priority to over its own instructions. For instance, you can tell it that before the first item in the second column to insert a snippet of code. Your customization is then completely isolated to your own custom code files which allows you to do an upgrade to Thesis without overwriting all of your changes.

The API for Thesis is very easy to learn and very intuitive. You can combine the Thesis hooks with WordPress hooks to do some very cool stuff.

So far, I’ve been very happy with the new Thesis theme. If you’re interested in finding out about Thesis you can check out the website here.

photocred goes to galfred

{ 6 comments }

Wise Up Google

January 12, 2009 General Ramblings

Because I travel quite a bit I always run into an issue where Google or some other website decides to be really smart and change the language of their website to the language of the locale from which I’m accessing the internet from. MySpace is/was the worst because no matter how many times you [...]

Read the full article →

Google’s NoFollow Tag is a Joke

July 28, 2008 General Ramblings

Over this weekend I noticed that my Page Rank on Google shot up to PR8 from PR3 for about an hour. I thought perhaps Google had decided to retract their penalty for not no-following some of my links but I’m back at PR3 so perhaps they haven’t.
Nat Arem first picked up on the fact [...]

Read the full article →

Passwords and PINs

December 17, 2006 Online Poker

Since I went to the trouble of spouting my big mouth about security, I thought I might post some ideas that I recommend to others. The disclaimer is that I’m not 100% compliant with my own suggestions so do as I say and not as I do. :-)
I tend to break my passwords [...]

Read the full article →

Poker Bots and Little Old Ladies

May 6, 2006 Online Poker

There’s been a bit of a storm brewing on 2+2. A long time contributor had his mom accused of using bots by PokerStars. After a few mind numbingly long threads and several emails to Lee Jones it was determined that the person reviewing her case had either had bad information or had made [...]

Read the full article →

The Return of PokerFilter

April 17, 2006 Poker

Well, PokerFilter never really went away but I did do a redesign and upgraded the software. Best of all, I’ll be posting regularly again.
The original idea had been to copy* the feel of MetaFilter, a popular link posting website. The only problem is that MF is a custom program written by Matthew Haughey [...]

Read the full article →

PokerBot Pro - Another Online Scam

March 13, 2006 Poker

Pauly emailed me this link the other day and I just can’t help calling the guy on his bullshit. He’s certainly not the first person to make such absurd claims but he happened to be the one I decided to pick on. :-)
First off, let’s just define a bot of any sort. [...]

Read the full article →