Read on Twitter
Here& #39;s some historical context and insight into why a leading poker room rep (GGPoker in this case) has no problem with stating that winning players are not welcome and might be banned; what the point of doing that is (not quite what people think) and what likely happens next.
Once the devastating end-game of continuing to operate online poker room in a pro-centric manner borrowed directly from B&M casinos was fully understood in 2009, those of us who sat on this knowledge faced a tough scenario.
Any individual changes we& #39;d implement to "fix" the operating model would put the sites we worked for at a huge short-term disadvantage. We& #39;d be in chicken race with those still obliviously riding new market waves and risk not having enough runway to capitalize longterm.
The only remedy was to implement enough radical changes so that we could adopt an entirely different marketing message and differentiate our product so much that we wouldn& #39;t even have direct competitors.
Our bosses weren& #39;t having it.
Our bosses weren& #39;t having it.
Many sound changes & innovations were introduced between 2010 and say 2015. New rake attribution models, new game formats, new software features, new markets, new marketing partnerships etc. But no-one adopted a singular strategy bold enough to fundamentally change the game.
The award for being closest goes to the @RelaxGamingLtd made Unibet Poker.
The reasons why everyone failed differs from operator to operator. Some lacked interest. Some lacked courage. Some lacked tech. Some lacked insight. Some lacked incentive and some had too much to lose.
The reasons why everyone failed differs from operator to operator. Some lacked interest. Some lacked courage. Some lacked tech. Some lacked insight. Some lacked incentive and some had too much to lose.
Stars belonged to the last category. They had so much to lose short-term they resisted the change until it was no longer possible to make a clean break. Hence the SNE debacle.
Once they did, the pressure was off. Unfortunately one things had happened by then:
Once they did, the pressure was off. Unfortunately one things had happened by then:
The market had essentially turned from an acquisition market to a retention market (more churned players than new players).
Any new strategy would either have to go mainstream to reach new demographics or convert players already sold on the get-good-and-win message.
Any new strategy would either have to go mainstream to reach new demographics or convert players already sold on the get-good-and-win message.
The former is hard because it is expensive in a lower reward retention market and the latter is hard because those players churned for a reason. They were told to look for the donkeys and realized they were it.
So a radical strategy was still the only viable option.
So a radical strategy was still the only viable option.
There are a couple of different approaches to take. One successful one was the one the social poker sites took.
Another is to radically innovate gameplay.
A third is the one GGPoker seems to be taking. It& #39;s all about messaging and is aimed directly at the churned masses.
Another is to radically innovate gameplay.
A third is the one GGPoker seems to be taking. It& #39;s all about messaging and is aimed directly at the churned masses.
From a poker ecology point of view banning winning players doesn& #39;t really change much. The predatory role remains and will be filled by someone else. It& #39;s better to play and win until you& #39;re banned than not play at all.
But the message itself is ultra-powerful.
But the message itself is ultra-powerful.
It says to recs: "look, we know the old strategy tilted the game in the pros favor; now it is your turn."
The experience of the attracted recs will be slightly different due to GGPoker& #39;s software innovations but this is mostly about perception.
Not judging. Just context.
The experience of the attracted recs will be slightly different due to GGPoker& #39;s software innovations but this is mostly about perception.
Not judging. Just context.
So what& #39;s the next step?
This should spark innovation.
By combining a different and clear message with potent software, GGPoker has established themselves as solid not-for-pros market leader.
Topple them will be hard. So maybe zig where they have zagged?
This should spark innovation.
By combining a different and clear message with potent software, GGPoker has established themselves as solid not-for-pros market leader.
Topple them will be hard. So maybe zig where they have zagged?
