2016 PokerStars VIP Club changes rile up high stakes pros

From Dani Stern:

Quote:

---

Full Disclosure: 95% of my rake contributed on Stars is from high stakes cash games. I was SNE last year, I am not this year. I expect these changes to affect my bottom line by around ~50k USD next year.

SNE changes

Last year when Stars increased the rake, I didn’t speak up at all. I thought the changes, while seemingly random and unexplainable, were not exactly disgraceful. It was simply a price change from the industry leader, one which justifiably caused outrage by their customer base. This new announcement however, has crossed the line into outright deception, and as far as I can tell is extremely unethical. The VIP program is not simply an annual program, which restarts at the end of every year. It’s actually a two year program, where you carry over your VIP status that you achieve on year one, over to year two. A huge percentage of the value in achieving SNE is that you maintain the SNE FPP multiplier for year two, and you can maintain it for the entire year even if you aren’t going to reach SNE status again. PokerStars is surely very aware that players have been grinding hard all year with the expectation that they would be able to maintain their SNE status until the end of next year. Making this announcement in November is truly an outrage. If that wasn't enough, they weren't even planning on announcing it yet! It leaked and they rushed the announcement.

On a personal note, I have always loved PokerStars as a company, and as a product. In the early years of online poker, way before they were industry leader, I loved the way the company was managed. Customer service, and an honest and open dialogue with the players were essential components to their business. It is why they thrived. Those days are long gone. To be clear, I am a capitalist, and I don't have a romantic view of what is a decidedly unromantic industry. I understand that PokerStars is a business operating in a mostly unregulated marketplace, my feelings are not hurt. But I am not about to get punched in the face and respond “well thats your right sir,” and neither should any of you.

---

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=233

Amaya cutting the fat

Embedded Tweet

Here is the 2+2 thread outlining the changes:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...-club-1568814/

And as already posted in the previous message, here is Ansky's (Dani Stern's) response:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=233


There are a lot of changes being made, but here are the three biggest ones:

1) Supernova Elite is being phased out.
- You will not be able to earn it in 2016.
- If you earned it in 2015 (or manage to earn it by 12/31/15), you will be grandfathered in to Supernova Elite for 2016, and get a maximum of 45% rakeback in 2016. Keep in mind that Supernova Elites could earn a maximum of 65% rakeback prior to this change.
- Starting on 1/1/17, Supernova Elite will be completely gone. The highest level at that point will be Supernova, and your maximum rakeback will be 30%.

2) No more rakeback or VPPs for medium and high stakes games. These games are defined as 5/10+ NL/PL, 10/20+ Eight-Game, and 15/30+ Limit.

3) FPPs will be converted to something called StarsCoin, which will result in a devaluation of FPPs.
- On 1/1/16, all FPPs will become StarsCoin, at the rate of 1.2 StarsCoin per FPP.
- Each StarsCoin will be worth 1 cent. This differs from FPPs, which had a variable value depending upon how redeemed.
- This will result in a devaluation of FPPs, because they were worth 1.6 cents each if redeemed optimally. However, they will only convert at 1.2 cents per FPP on 1/1/16.
- On August 12, 2015, Amaya reported that it had $105,250,000 worth of FPPs in player accounts. http://www.amaya.com/wp-content/uplo...5-FS-FINAL.pdf ... As you can see, this major devaluation will save a lot of money for Amaya, especially in the case of players who do not rush to redeem their FPPs before the 1/1/16 conversion.

There is one announced change which I do not understand. Supernova and Supernova Elite will no longer require monthly play in order to keep those statuses in the subsequent year. Currently, if you earn Supernova or Supernova Elite, you can keep them in the following year by simply reaching a minimum number of VPPs per month. So since these are being done away with, does this mean that you get Supernova for the entire following year regardless of play? Or does everyone start back up at BronzeStar on January 1?

Also announced was the fact that most third party poker assistance programs will be banned for use with Pokerstars.

My opinion:

I think Amaya/Stars is overall doing the right thing, but is also being somewhat unethical here. First and foremost, I want to say that these angry grinders need to get over themselves.

Or, simply put, they are not nearly as important or special as they think they are.

Let's pause for a second and realize what these grinders want: They believe they should pay less rake per hand than everyone else, simply because they put in a lot of volume.

What?!

Does it work that way in live card rooms? Are you allowed to pay less rake per hand just because you play every day? Of course not. Everyone pays the same rake, whether a recreational occasional visitor or an all-day-every-day grinder.

So why should online be any different?

It's been different because of the very old school model where grinders were seen equivalent to prop players. That is, it was assumed that grinders started and maintained running games, so therefore they should share in the fruits that the site would gain from these games consistently running.

I still believe that grinders are very important on small and medium sized sites, and thus they do deserve special treatment. After all, if a recreational player shows up and sees no games running at the limits he wants to play, he simply closes the software and never sits down at a table. Therefore, grinders who keep games going on such sites are quite important.

However, on Pokerstars, grinders are not necessary. The site is already huge and active. The games would thrive with or without the professional grinders present on Pokerstars.

Amaya realizes this, and decided that they are tired of giving away extra money to these people.

They also realized that these players also tend to win, meaning that those players cashing out removes money from Pokerstars' economy which could have otherwise been raked.

Therefore, Amaya has determined that grinders are of little value to Pokerstars, even considering the high amount of overall rake they pay. Thus, they are removing much of the incentive for them to regularly play, and are aiming for a site that features a higher percentage of amateurs, and a lower percentage of grinders. They are not outright kicking off the grinders, but simply are no longer rewarding them nearly as much.

I cannot fault Amaya for this. I have long felt that large sites are needlessly giving away the farm to high-volume players, who are no longer necessary on such sites to sustain game activity.

With that said, I do find some fault in the way Amaya is handling this:

1) As Dani Stern pointed out, Pokerstars lied to their super-regulars in 2015 by portraying Supernova Elite as being worth 65% rakeback once earned:

https://embed.gyazo.com/011a34bfbfc5...7e8482c33c.png

(The above image is STILL on the Pokerstars website, as of today!)

They lied because the 65% will fall to 45% in 2016. As Supernova Elite is far easier to maintain in the subsequent year than outright earning it initially, it is unethical to chop the benefits like this in the second year as they are doing. It is safe to assume that players earning it in 2015 believed they were getting 65% this year AND next year, and Stars is now changing that after-the-fact, which is not at all fair.


2) The devaluation of FPPs is not fair. These should be converted at 1.6 StarCoins per FPP, not 1.2. They are only giving 2 months notice for players to spend their FPPs at the current 1.6 rate, and this especially harms casual players who may not be aware of the change. Even if Stars sends out an e-mail to all players explaining the changes, it will be too difficult for casual players to understand that they will be losing 25% value of their FPPs. This does not surprise me, though, because Pokerstars screwed its US players after Black Friday regarding FPP value. They got away with this because they still looked like angels compared to Full Tilt and UB, both of whom stole all the money on deposit.


3) Medium and high stakes players are really getting the shaft. I don't understand why they are not entitled to ANY rakeback or ANY VPPs to earn VIP status. While this is not "unfair" (because basically Stars can set whatever policy it wants going forward), it really is a big slap in the face to anyone who plays middle stakes and above, INCLUDING recreational players. Remember, not all recreational players play low stakes games.


One thing I fully support regarding their recent policy changes involves the third party software ban. That should have been done a long time ago, as it provides an unfair advantage to those with these tools, and that's against the entire spirit of poker. You should succeed or fail at poker only with what you can do with your own mind. You should never succeed due to computerized tools which give you an unfair computational edge over other players without such tools. So good for Stars on that one.

Overall, Amaya is doing the right thing by giving the middle finger to its super-grinders, but they also should have approached it more ethically, and at least handled their prior obligations fairly.

Last year the new Amaya owned Pokerstars went for the throat with rake changes and reward cuts that caused people to go off on 2+2. I can't remember exactly what went down but all the changes they made either didn't go exactly as they proposed where they caved in not making it as extreme and they reverted back some if I recall.

I'm not the guy who knows all this completely since I can't play on Pokerstars so I don't keep up with it but I wonder if they will go for the max cuts then people will bitch and they will still cut but not as bad making the people feel as if they won by coming to a medium even though really Pokerstars does since they were able to cut some things out.

Let's see in a month or so if Pokerstars backs out of a few things they are proposing not making as many cuts but as for the third party software I think it's great. The 24 tabling guy who relies on it heavily on customized hud/program they use will either have their win rate decrease or be forced to learn to play with less stats available to them, which might mean they have to reduce their tables significantly.

Druff, your comments on Amaya are more favorable that i expected...

so do you have any financial interest (own stock or debt) in Amaya? just wondering

Very impressed with your response Todd. Super fucked up by Amaya, but within thier rights. While they may be screwing over the high stakes player pool, the amount of savings will outweigh any losses they may incur. They no longer need the high stakes / high volume grinder anymore so fuck them.

If this was DK or FD f'ing over the same pool of people, it could kill thier business given where these companies are in thier life cycle. Amaya in their case is pass this point and no longer needs to cater to them.

TLDR: Smart move for Amaya, sucks for the grinders, but they have no leg to stand on (No where else to go).

While fundamentally I agree with you Druff, I think you are missing something that may (possibly) happen that will basically destroys PokerStars.

Part of the reason Recs enjoy playing on PokerStars is they know they can log in and find a game at any level, of any type, running within seconds (usually). If this were to change because a run of Regs can no longer play, and the queue times go up, Recs will leave and the economy will be crushed.

There is another factor that plays into this as well. Amaya thinks that this change will bring more Recs into the game. I just fundamentally disagree with that notion. The economy is very mature in Western Europe and Canada. To think this is all of a sudden going to create some gigantic growth market is unrealistic at best and totally irresponsible at worst.

Also, B&P mentioned earlier the rake raise they attempted to enact last year that failed miserably. Players left in such droves that the rake increase was offset by the rake decrease from such fewer games happening. Could the same thing happen again?

Let’s do a little math.

50 tables of a game running

70% Reg

Average Reg is 8 tabling


50 x 9 x .7 = 315 Reg Sports / 8 = 40 Regs

What if 10% can’t make it now?

4 people x 8 tables = 32 seats / 6.3 seats a table = 5 lost tables

What if 25% can’t make it now?

10 people x 8 tables = 80 seats / 6.3 seats a table = 13 lost tables

What if 50% can’t make it now’?

20 people x 8 tables = 160 seats / 6.3 seats a table = 25 lost tables


Let’s take the smallest example

If 5 lost tables means 45 lost spots. Even if they were all earning 45% rake back and Recs earn maybe 10% on average we still have to replace roughly 30 Reg spots with 30 Rec spots. Are there going to be 30 new Recs 24/7 to keep the rake earned the same?

Take Away Analysis:

This will really destroy the Hyper SNG economy. Which will in turn destroy the entire SNG economy.

Secondly, I think Amaya is short sighted on the growth figures they will need to make up for the loss of rake.

Third, I think Amaya thinks the rake back pros will take this on the chin.

Fourth, I don’t think the rake back pros will, they will just quit.

Fifth, this may give a chance for ACR to really pick up steam.

Sixth, Fuck Amaya

Seventh, Fuck Sheldon Adelson

Eight, Fuck Me for not being able to play on PokerStars anymore

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Also announced was the fact that most third party poker assistance programs will be banned for use with Pokerstars.

---

Are we talking HUDs and such? I think this is as revealing about their marketing emphasis as anything else written. I know we are early on in this discussion but I am surprised this hasn't gotten a reaction.

DraftKings/FanDuel is very much in the news, of course. They have been a monster built & marketed to casual sports fans/gamblers. PStars is in the same business and are very interested.

Remember PStars now has sportsbook and other offerings. A brick & mortars offers poker but it's not that profitable compared other activities in the house. They hope to bring people in and then lure them to the other things they offer. Grinders don't wander through the casino.

Like BNP this is just a curiosity to me as an American citizen. I mean I am concerned what PStars will be like for my yet unborn grandchildren when online is finally legalized in US nationally.

Has Amaya executed their transition poorly for the reasons Druff sites? Unethical, idk. We will see how they respond. Where is that old crone Daniel Negraneau on this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

Where is that old crone Daniel Negraneau on this?

---

He has been defending it heavily on Twitter.

Although he says not all the information has been released yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abrown83

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

Where is that old crone Daniel Negraneau on this?

---

He has been defending it heavily on Twitter.

Although he says not all the information has been released yet.

---

What is his defense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abrown83

He has been defending it heavily on Twitter.

Although he says not all the information has been released yet.

---

What is his defense?

---

Daniel is such a PStars schill. He defended the FPP cuts blindly, too.

Poker welfare is coming to an end. Amaya is shitty to do it but folks should of known this was coming.

I actually agree with druff. Regs over value themselves..

No one is leaving p.s. for acr...

Acr lovez people 24 tabling it and give u the world for it. But its a small site. Without them there are no tables..

No one is leaving poker stars to play in acr. Acr is all regs just grinding 80 hours a week for the "beast".

Regs really have an entitled mentality, even to there winnings

I actually agree with druff. Regs over value themselves..

No one is leaving p.s. for acr...

Acr lovez people 24 tabling it and give u the world for it. But its a small site. Without them there are no tables..

No one is leaving poker stars to play in acr. Acr is all regs just grinding 80 hours a week for the "beast".

Regs really have an entitled mentality, even to there winnings

Bovada has risen to the No. 3 poker site on Poker Scout after PokerStars and 888poker. Looks like PStars is noticing how Bovada has grown since their changes.

The Bovada lure has largely been the "soft play" and of course their sportsbook. Bovada has smashed it since their change in emphasis.

All the pissing and moaning from those who grind is understandable but most of these guys are sharp and understand business is business. PStars owes a debt to their loyalty and needs to clean up the transition. Be classy. Class has been a hallmark of Bovada from my experience.

Lol, Negraneau. How many stock options was he given?

We shouldn't be comparing Bovada to Pokerstars.

Bovada is #3 because where else can Americans who want to play go? What site has the best reputation to pay you for years now that has the softest games serving most American states?

ROW players have other options besides Pokerstars so the recreational model Bovada has implemented the best they can would backfire in Pokerstars face if they went on that completely.

Pokerstars has to find that comfortable medium where they will make more by paying less in rakeback but not lose a bunch of customers in the process. The key should be to continue on offering more incentive perks then your competition while making minor cuts year by year to soften the blow. If you take too much away from people all at once they never will be too happy about it.

As abrown discusses which I've mentioned in past threads as well is that you need some regs around who create games and keep them going.

Imagine a model where only recs were 1 to 2 tabling while hitting and running all over the place?

A site might save money in processing fees for cashouts without a bunch of regs who take money off and eventually rake the recs down a lot which in theory sounds great for a site BUT if very few games are running then are they really coming out ahead?

Just like any business it's 100% about finding that balance to make you the most money while keeping your customers happy enough to give you their business.

As for the nosebleed guys like Phil Galfond I don't know what it cost to move millions of dollars around these days but their are way more people playing 2/4NL to 10/20NL then 25/50NL+.

If the nosebleed guys playing 25/50 or higher NL/PLO aren't profitable that much to a site then it's hard to say what they should do. Full Tilt and a few others already eliminated the large nosebleed games so Pokerstars is about the only place left for them to play. Perhaps a new rake structure such as adding in some combination of hand and timed rake for nosebleed games might be something to consider.

I'm not a fan of rake increases at any stake but the reality is the guy playing 50c/1d NL is getting raped hard percentage wise in rake compared to the nosebleed guys with what each hand is capped at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handicapme

Very impressed with your response Todd.

---

Agreed, I think Todd was spot on here

I don't really mind some form of game preservation. Enabling the rakeback pro BS to continue this long was likely bad for the community to begin with and recs don't really have to gain anything directly from this to still gain a fuck ton.

It's ok if the mass multi tabling camp can paint a picture of them being needed for something and indeed be fighting for the whole community if it means we're getting a better price for 2016, as long as Amaya does go through with enough changes to discourage their existence.

imo the only bad bit about this is lying to the players about next years SNE - otherwise it's just a business decision which we'll all have to cope with. Regardless, and like many others, I'll still be playing on Stars in 2016.

As a 2x former SNE this is a sad day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abrown83

While fundamentally I agree with you Druff, I think you are missing something that may (possibly) happen that will basically destroys PokerStars.

Part of the reason Recs enjoy playing on PokerStars is they know they can log in and find a game at any level, of any type, running within seconds (usually). If this were to change because a run of Regs can no longer play, and the queue times go up, Recs will leave and the economy will be crushed.

There is another factor that plays into this as well. Amaya thinks that this change will bring more Recs into the game. I just fundamentally disagree with that notion. The economy is very mature in Western Europe and Canada. To think this is all of a sudden going to create some gigantic growth market is unrealistic at best and totally irresponsible at worst.

Also, B&P mentioned earlier the rake raise they attempted to enact last year that failed miserably. Players left in such droves that the rake increase was offset by the rake decrease from such fewer games happening. Could the same thing happen again?

Let’s do a little math.

50 tables of a game running

70% Reg

Average Reg is 8 tabling


50 x 9 x .7 = 315 Reg Sports / 8 = 40 Regs

What if 10% can’t make it now?

4 people x 8 tables = 32 seats / 6.3 seats a table = 5 lost tables

What if 25% can’t make it now?

10 people x 8 tables = 80 seats / 6.3 seats a table = 13 lost tables

What if 50% can’t make it now’?

20 people x 8 tables = 160 seats / 6.3 seats a table = 25 lost tables


Let’s take the smallest example

If 5 lost tables means 45 lost spots. Even if they were all earning 45% rake back and Recs earn maybe 10% on average we still have to replace roughly 30 Reg spots with 30 Rec spots. Are there going to be 30 new Recs 24/7 to keep the rake earned the same?

Take Away Analysis:

This will really destroy the Hyper SNG economy. Which will in turn destroy the entire SNG economy.

Secondly, I think Amaya is short sighted on the growth figures they will need to make up for the loss of rake.

Third, I think Amaya thinks the rake back pros will take this on the chin.

Fourth, I don’t think the rake back pros will, they will just quit.

Fifth, this may give a chance for ACR to really pick up steam.

Sixth, Fuck Amaya

Seventh, Fuck Sheldon Adelson

Eight, Fuck Me for not being able to play on PokerStars anymore

---

I think you're missing something here.

It's not about rake collected or number of tables running.

It's not about bringing a larger number of recs to the game. I agree with you that these changes are unlikely to bring MORE recreational players to Pokerstars.

I believe that Amaya is aware that these changes might very well result in a lesser amount of rake collected per day.

I believe that Amaya is aware that these changes won't grow their recreational player base, and in fact will result in fewer overall tables running.

But I think they're willing to sacrifice that in order to get rid of a healthy portion of their regular "cashing out" players.

This is where online poker room and brick and mortar poker room goals sharply differ.

B&M rooms simply want to collect rake, while online rooms want to both keep a flow of deposits, and keeping cashouts to a minimum.

This is because most live players cash out after EVERY SESSION, so the only thing that matters to B&M rooms is the rake they collect in between.

Online poker rooms only make money when deposits come in, and they lose some of that money back when they have to forward it off as cashouts. The ideal situation for an online poker room would be a group of middling players who never win enough to cash out significant money, but where all deposited money gets raked off, requiring players to make more deposits.

If a fish deposits $1000 and loses it to a pro within 2 hands, that's a disaster as far as an online poker site sees it, especially after footing the bill for processing the deposit..

So getting back to this, Stars is happy enough if a rec player can find a game he likes. They don't want him to run into all zeroes when he looks at the list of games he wants to play, but they also don't need 50 tables of the same game running. They just need all recs to have a game they can find quickly and easily.

You also might be overestimating the regulars' resolve to quit. I don't think most of them will. In fact, most don't have any other option to make a living, so they will begrudgingly give up the SNE value that they grew to love, and just accept the reduced awards Stars has to offer.

Amaya simply lowered the value of these players to the company. They are saying, "You can stay, and we don't mind having you here, but we sure as hell aren't going to give you a lot of extras to stay here. And if you like that, scram. We won't miss you."