Zak Wray shared his opinion about the new Pokerstars owners
Well I don't really know much about the new owners or their intentions so I can't really give an educated answer to that. I think it's a fucking joke how they originally said that the site was only going to be exclusively poker, with no casino-type games involved, but I think they have moved in that direction with some countries? So in that regard the future of skilled games looks vulnerable to say the least. At the end of the day they will always come back with, it's good for the games if there are more new customers on the site, but that really isn't good for the games, it just makes the site a quick buck and gives their shareholders something to celebrate at their next team meeting.
Just looks like Pokerstars is moving in the same direction as other companies like Betfair, where profits are their only focus, whereas I think a few years ago they were more committed to offering quality of games before profits.
Just another cloud on the future of the game we love. Whatever happens, it's been fun - nothing lasts forever.
Seems a bit pointless to do an opinion piece that opens with "I don't really know much.... so I can't give an educated answer on that".
Whilst I agree with Zak that it is a shame that pokerstars is treading into the casino waters we have to look at the bigger picture. Pokerstars focused exclusively poker for a long time, they have long been close to monopolizing the industry whilst still providing a service that customers have been for the large part happy with. Pre Black Friday there had been issues with the "real meaning " of the wire act, with poker companies taking the stance that they do not fall under that umbrella of legislation, and making healthy profits as a result. Is it not a surprise to anyone then, that when faced with aggressive legislation, taxes and segregration of markets as a result of being lumped in with other gambling platforms that pokerstars really has any other option. They are effectively being told they are a gambling site, and have been pushed into a box that suppresses them from their own market and the freedom to connect to new ones, so what are they mean to do? Adamantly forgo the opportunity for a new revenue stream in the face of dying existing ones? Ones that are dying not from loss of interest, but merely legislation? Taking this into account it seems only natural that there be some capitalization on casino games within the software, but to what extent is acceptable before the original product is compromised is purely subjective. Whilst I am personally unhappy with it, it is merely selfish reasons of my own income being slightly hindered, I believe this is the same for any other professional unhappy with the change. It's not like video game players get unhappy when new video games come out, because it doesn't matter how many games there are there will always be a large enough player base for every game to get the entertainment you need. We have to remember that for most users poker is meant for entertainment, so the introduction of these new casino games just mean an expansion of choice for the casual customer, with no degregation in game quality (because they will have access to every game they want at a cick of a button).
A more optimistic approach may also factor in how the including casino games could affect the player base in the face of fully regulated markets. Imagine if pokerstars because the one stop shop for online gambling, having a similar monopoly on that like they do on poker now. There is no doubt in my mind that this situation has the possibility to be advantageous to prefessional. Currently we are in the situation where a persons online poker wallet is bleeding into their online gambling wallet, but eventually we may be in a position where a persons online gambling wallet bleeds into their online poker one. The latter can only happen when pokerstars establishes itself as a gambling website that also offers poker instead of a poker site that also offers gambling, the difference is really only in the eyes of the customer, but perpetuating both sides to each respective audience could mean a lot to future traffic and revenue for everyone.
Check out my Hyper Turbo Video Pack
Follow me on twitter
Great post Chadders! A hearty +1 to it.
Casino games, sports-betting, and yes spin-and-gos will drive deposits and traffic that would go else where.
From amaya investor presentation pg. 17 (http://www.amayagaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Amaya-Oldford-Inve...)
Pokerstars/FTP right now derives 100% of their revenue from poker, while bwin.party 18%, and 888holdings 29%. With superior service, support, and software, Stars will take marketshare from them at a rapid pace with the inclusion of sports-betting and casino games. This will drive more deposits and bring more liquidity to the pokerside. At the very least Amaya will rake in money long after poker has dried up (I am long AYA.TO).
It could go either way.
The extreme cases are:
- Player base remains constant & spreading of casino games dilutes fish poker action
- Spreading of casino games increases fish player base some of which will play poker making the action better
Unfortunately, given there is already a mature market for casino games & sports betting I'm inclined to think that the games will end up in an equilibrium closer to the first scenario.
I actually agree with this. Bovada in the us is one of the softest sites I've ever played on and a lot of that has to do with its very large sports bettor player base. These sports bettors mix in some poker and most have no experience in the game. These are players that would never play on a "poker only" site. Still think it's wait and see mode. But I hardly think all the sky is falling stuff is a reality.
edit: this was supposed to be a reply to chadders