All-in Poker - feeling a bit let down

RoundTower wrote:

Didn't you get free money instead? I liked this much much better than the freerolls.

I got $20 one month and $10 the next (that was Dec I think), with nothing since. $20 is not going ot make a huge difference to my bankroll, a chance at winning a freeroll with restricted numbers for raked hand played, with a juicy prizefund, would certainly be my preference.

A pyramid scheme is a non-sustainable business model that involves the exchange of money primarily for enrolling other people into the scheme, usually without any product or service being delivered. Pyramid schemes have existed for at least a century. In addition, other methods of conducting business known as multi-level marketing (MLM) and as "matrix schemes" often closely resemble pyramid schemes (although unlike pyramid schemes, which are almost always frauds, MLM and matrix schemes are in many cases regarded — at least legally — as legitimate business methods).

Most pyramid schemes are attempts to confuse potential consumers into complicated but convincingly fool-proof money making scams. The essential idea behind each scam is that the individual only makes one payment, but somehow they are promised to receive exponential benefits from other people as a reward. A common example might be that a victim is enticed with an offer that, for a fee, allows them to sell the same offer to other people. Each sale includes a fee to the original seller. Clearly, the fundamental flaw is that there is no end benefit; the money simply travels up the chain, and only the originator wins in swindling his followers. Furthermore, the people in the worst situation are the ones at the bottom of the pyramid: those who subscribed to the plan, but were not able to recruit any followers themselves. To embellish the act, most such scams will have fake referrals, testimonials, and information.

Although pyramid schemes have been declared illegal in many countries, they still persist in various forms.

and Multi-Level Marketing:

In a typical multi-level marketing or network marketing arrangement, individuals associate with a parent company as an independent contractor and are compensated based on their sales of products or service (as well as the sales achieved by those they bring into the business).

In a legitimate MLM company, commissions are earned only on sales to the end-user, who is often also a distributor. No money may be earned from recruiting alone ("sign-up fees"). Some companies produce revenues primarily by attracting new participants or selling them marketing services, as opposed to selling actual products. One must analyze the compensation plan to determine whether participants are paid from actual sales to customers and not from new-recruit bonuses or business support sales.

Multi-level marketing has a recognized image problem due to the fact that it is often difficult to distinguish legitimate MLMs from such illegal scams as pyramid or Ponzi schemes. NM/MLM businesses do operate legitimately in all 50 U.S. states and more than 100 other countries, and new businesses may use terms like "affiliate marketing" or "home-based business franchising."

ocallagh wrote:

If you can build your downline to 50 active players it should cover your rent. I have 23 active players in my downline and I'm on target for about 300 this month... and all I have to pay is $75 in rake over 1 month. For me it is far better than a rakeback deal on another site.

And also, those 23 players are not solely supporting me... The same 23 players will appear in different levels of other downlines too.

If you're a high stakes player maybe a proper rakeback scheme would suit better, but for the majority of players I think All-In is genuinely a better choice. (You just need to build your downline.... which is a pain). I've started offering punters $25 for joining with a further $25 if they fill their raked hands in their first month.

My qustion to Paul is there must be a sauturation point. I know All In is quite small right now, but when you do have 150,000 players and there are literally no more players out there... what do the bottom line do then?

What we are attempting here is something very different to the traditional poker sites. It seems, as the various posts demonstrate, that we still have a long way to go to package our product in an easy to understand manner. Whereas for some people it is obvious why All In is a good place to play, for some it is not. And I accept that we need to improve the communication here, and we are working hard on this.

All In Poker is a relationships marketing company with a multi-level commission program. It is based on MLM or multi-level marketing principles whereby a company saves on marketing spend and gives this cash to the members to promote the business for them. Our product is online poker. Hopefully we will be expanding this to other online games in the future.

All In give 51% of the net revenues back to the members. If we were PartyPoker (har har, I hear you say) this would be c. $500M per annum. At the moment this money goes to PartyPoker shareholders. And you call us a pyramid scheme? Who’s gaining at Party and Stars?

You guys know where the players are, and we are providing infrastructure to allow you to generate extra cash income by referring them to All In.

The fundamental idea is that members have a stake in the business and therefore have an incentive to promote the product to their friends using the myriad marketing assets that they have (e.g. blog, website, network of friends, card club, internet radio station, internat cafe etc.). Business is all about using your assets to add value. Some people have assets and don’t realise it. Currently, every poker player who knows poker players have an asset which is convertible to cash on All In Poker.

As everyone is an affiliate and in someone’s downline, commission flows sooner or later. I agree that for some people an immediate rake-back program will pay out more. However, in the mid to long term, All In will pay out more. Personally I don’t think rake-back schemes are sustainable as it is just discounting in reverse. If I offer 30% then this weeks new online poker site will offer 31% etc. etc. until the margins are squeezed so tight that there is nowhere to go. Rake-back is a mug’s game. As soon as All In Poker’s average monthly commission exceeds average monthly rake-back then you’re laughing.

With regard to the pyramid idea I can understand why people think this because the downline is a 5x7 downline, and is, well, “triangular”. Well, it's not a pyramid scheme (see other people’s reasons above). It doesn't quack. Costs nothing to join. Doesn’t have promotion tiers – no “World Leaders” here. Also, it is true and verifiable that your position in the downline does not mean you always earn more than people below you. The reason for that is that if I refer you and you are placed, say, in my Level 5, and you refer lots of people, most will be outside my commission downline (Levels 1-7). It boils down to the quality and quantity of the players your refer and they refer. At All In you do have to put in some effort to refer people and you have to get face-to-face with people and explain the concept to them. We are working on new tools to make this easier.

With regard to the freerolls, I can understand the frustration here. It actually boils down to us learning about the drivers of the business after we started and as we went along. Pure Freerolls are a waste of money as they attract freeroll bunnies only, who do not convert to cash players. Sorry, but that’s no good to you or us. However, all Prima freerolls are now free (no raked hands required) so there are still lots of Freerolls on All In Poker! Freerolls for 500 raked hands etc. are better value designed to reward loyal players. However, we found that our players prefer to receive the Start Up bonus! Either way the money is going back to the players. It's not like we are keeping it or something. As I say you cannot please everyone.

With regard to Ocallagh's question above, I guess all of the poker industry will be upset when the players dry up! But where are they going to be when this doomsday scenario happens….? You got it. I think the answer is that All In Poker's business model will evolve according to various key milestones (profitability, new product launches, acquisitions etc.). If you have a future scenario where there are people without a downline then we will apply other incentives to these people to ensure they stay on the site. There are lots of ways of achieving this but I am not going to publish them here. Once you are profitable, and have lots of cash earning members, i.e. you have hit that “critical mass”, then you have a lot more freedom in how you run your business and how you spend your money (as opposed to our member’s money). This will be a very nice problem to have.

In the meantime, continue to send us your feedback, which is all read and processed and worried about, but don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

DeVore wrote:

The people who are complaining they aren't seeing much return are the people who made the mistake of thinking it WAS a pyramid scheme and once they were high up, they didnt have to do anything else. That just isnt true as if you dont invite anyone and you don't play you WILL GET NOTHING. Why should you get anything?!

DeV.

I am not complaining about not getting anything back, I am complaining about the fact that the freerolls for raked hands, which was a big consideration in my subscribing to All In have not materialised. To me, this amounts to false advertising, and with anyone else outside of All In or PPP, I think you would have a problem with this also. I am not trying to have a go at you Tom, sorry if it comes across that way. I quite liked the ideas of freerolls with decent prize funds and restricted players, and a reasonable standard of play, as all entrants would have to play over 750 raked hands a month.