Why PartyPoker's chip cap is right 19/02/2010
PARTYPOKER recently announced a cap on the number of play money chips a player can acquire. At first glance this move may appear to be an unnecessary, Scrooge-like measure, but the idea actually has some merits.
First off, for whatever reason, many players desire to have as large of a play money chip balance as possible so they often chip dump between accounts, or even buy and sell accounts via secondary services like ChipEmpire.
Chip dumping hurts the game for everyone, and most poker rooms provide no policing of play money games. But buying and selling accounts is not only a violation of most room’s T&C’s (as is chip dumping), but could also be construed as providing value which could then be argued that play money gaming is actual gambling: which could put many rooms in hot water if a zealous attorney decided to pursue the matter.
It could also become problematic for poker rooms that rely heavily on the distinction between their .NET and .COM offerings. Many media partners have very strict rules regarding this separation of play and real money, and if it becomes common knowledge that there is a secondary market for play money chips, it could influence their decision on whether or not to accept advertising from poker sites.
PartyPoker’s decision to cap the number of play money chips a player can hold discourages both chip dumping and account selling while having a relatively minimal impact on players who simply wish to enjoy a game of poker without risking any cash.
Perhaps just as important is the fact that after 120 days, the conversion rate from play money to real money player drops to a number so low that it is effectively 0. Players using the play money system after 120 days are of near zero value to a poker room, so in effect they are simply an unnecessary cost to the business.
While it is easy to argue that the cost of supporting those players is minimal, it is still a cost. As competition heats up in the online poker sector, many poker rooms will be forced to look at the costs associated with maintaining their play money player base. They will need to either find a way to monetize those players or kick them off of the system.
This may be the first shot over the bow but won’t likely be the last we hear about poker rooms changing policies regarding play money players. After all, with 90%+ of poker players being in the red, poker rooms would be wise to start thinking of themselves as entertainment providers rather than as casinos.
Thoughts? EGR welcomes pitches for blog posts of 300-400 words on topical issues in egaming. Email online editor Jon Parker for details.
Thoughts? EGR welcomes pitches for blog posts of 300-400 words on topical issues in egaming. Email deputy editor Stephen Carter for details.
Posted: 19/02/2010
User comments
Anonymous
As a player who started out playing in the play money games and who has now been "converted" into a semi-regular recreational player in the real money games at various sites, I consider this to be an extremely poor decision by Party. One of my goals when I started playing in those play money games was to accumulate as many chips as possible (as that is main objective for all players - to accumulate more and more chips!) and this kept me playing. Had there been an unreasonably low "cap" on the number of chips which I was able accumulate at one particular site, I would have simply switched to alternative site which did not impose such a cap. Additionally, I believe that any players currently at Party who have been playing for play money but who were considering switching over to the real money games will consider this to be a fairly cynical move by Party which may prompt them to start looking for alternative sites to play at.
Anonymous
" I would have simply switched to alternative site which did not impose such a cap"
I think this is one of the main points that is being made. Play money players are an unnecessary cost to the business, so by imposing the cap you're discouraging people from using your bandwidth for excessive periods whilst still offering the Play money service to genuine, new players. These companies are in business to earn profits remember, not to offer a free service.
john
When is the world going to wake up and start looking between the lines, chip selling, how many people are stupid enough to buy play chips. Do you actually believe this is the main reason Party Poker put a cap on play money,Noooooooo its to disinterest anyone that plays for fun and actually sets a goal that might take along time. If you make play money boring enough then its more likely people will invest and play for real money, plus i cant believe he mentions the cost of running the play money side as another reason to think about a cap. A site that makes millions monthly has the nerve to say they should start thinking about themselves instead of acting like a casino. Bill Rini, you should be embarrassed at putting your name behind this obvious B.S. and to be selfish enough to say that poker rooms should think about themselves more is a statement that can only be considered ignorant and selfish, every part of on-line poker rooms is thinking about themselves.
Another pathetic display by a Poker room that answers to nobody and now feels the player is working them instead of the other way around.
Poker Site Employee
Play Chip players cost money... it is not a trivial amount. Particularly at peak times they impact the performance of the real-money site. Two good reasons; (1) protect the integrity of "free" poker & advertising and (2) improves performance.
egrjobs.com
Webmaster
EsandaRecruitment.com , UK
Domain Manager
EsandaRecruitment.com , UK
Web & Customer Services Operators – Norwegian
Ladbrokes , UK
Data Executive
Ladbrokes , UK
Payment Solutions Manager
Ladbrokes , UK
Events
-
Power LatAm offers a mix of lively debate and effective networking - this event is a must-attend for anyone looking…
-
EGR B2B Awards 2010 New for 2010 is the launch of a set of awards for the industry’s service providers…
-
If you came to the first eGR Live in December 2009 you will know that this is a brand new…
Anonymous
It definitely makes sense. In addition, because of the 'chip selling websites', not only the poker room's credibility at stake, but also some good players ending up submitting their vital information to those sites, which further lead to get their accounts hacked. It is very good to have such a cap, which takes care of all such activities, without a huge cost on policing the play money games.
Appreciated.
» Report this comment