Rewards in challenges should be changed.

[Emiboo]

Rewards system in poker needs some tweaking. I play poker for money, not avatars or backgrounds.

those should be removed and replaced with tickets or money. I hate it when you are battling with those challenges and then you only get measley avatar that serves no purpose to me.

tumblr_inline_mqo5j6viyn1qz4rgp

[MANNO86]

dad

[Yoggiboss]

I agree!

[Andrew]

 

It doesn't work that way.  The unlockable content doesn't have monetary value.  This is why we can have such a big prize for 1000 Challenge points (which is equivalent to €10 raked).  The jump from 500 points to 1000 points awards €3, which would be 60% rb equivalent if you thought of it that way.  But the right way to think about it is that so far you've raked roughly €10, and got a €3 reward and an avatar.  If we didn't do it that way, the payouts would have to be €1 and €2 for the first two steps, which feels much lower.

Secondly, lots of people really like this part of the system.  Some people don't play a great deal of poker, but want to have all the unlockable content.  That's why the avatars and backgrounds are always early on in the payouts.  It may well be that YOU play purely for the money, but our aim is to keep casual players alive for as long as possible.  That's why the low end of Challenges pays out so much.  Keeping those players around for as long as possible is to your advantage too, as I'm sure you can see, and it's the reason we're the only poker site that grew year on year.

[Sect7G]

I agree with Andrew that the avatars and table themes becoming unlockable does add to retention and is a realistic visible goal to the recreational player.  The area that I think needs to be done away with or made more relevant is achievements portion.  These aren't visible nor do they have any monetary value to them.

[Lollero]

What kind of rakeback percentage is the challenges system equivalent to? I have heard that it's about 30% is this true?

I agree that it's important to keep the recreational players happy so no problems with avatar and background prizes.

[psrquack]

As a saw the last avatar reward in at the 6000 points station which you can easily reach after playing a month and you'll still have 2 months for a real rewards. I personally think is much better (more +EV) playing your own game and don't bother with points and challenge requirements. So I like the mix of points +avatars+bonuses+tickets.

[Andrew]

---

@Lollero wrote:

What kind of rakeback percentage is the challenges system equivalent to? I have heard that it's about 30% is this true?

I agree that it's important to keep the recreational players happy so no problems with avatar and background prizes.

---

105379-rb%20percentage

And zoomed in a bit:

107745-challenges

[Sect7G]

Just a suggestion but looking at the top graph you posted it might make sense to make a cut from 2 million points onwards.  If after 2 million points it reached a cap of 50% I doubt many would change sites.  This money should be used on promotions or to increase rb for the valley that is 10% rb.

[ArtyMcFly]

Rakeback for low volume microstakes players is VERY generous, and I think the avatars and table backgrounds are a brilliant way to "reward" casual players. (I change my backdrops on an almost daily basis and this seems like a good opportunity to say Thank You to the designers for coming up with new and original graphics. Nice work fellas!)

I'm actually one of the people that gets relatively low rakeback rate (I earn about 30-40,000 points per quarter), but I have no real complaints about the system. For selfish reasons, I'd prefer if the rakeback graph was "flatter", but I think Andrew knows whats best for the site in the medium to long term.

[Andrew]

---

@Sect7G wrote:

Just a suggestion but looking at the top graph you posted it might make sense to make a cut from 2 million points onwards.  If after 2 million points it reached a cap of 50% I doubt many would change sites.  This money should be used on promotions or to increase rb for the valley that is 10% rb.

---

Yeh, this is roughly what I'm interested in doing for Q4.  Potentially doing it from 1.25m, it's already in the low 40s by then.  I think I like keeping the floor roughly where it is, but raising the first couple of payout steps.  

But as you know, from Q1 '17, I'd like to cut loyalty payouts by about 33%, and use that money to fund the bonus shop.  The idea is that we give free bonus money to our biggest losing players, and I'd like to fund this pretty heavily.

[finamala]

when you look at other sites and their rakeback,  I think Unibet is pretty generous when you consider everything.  Often you can make money with mission rewards too, and monthly promos, don't forget that.

[Sweeedeeen]

---

@Andrew-Unibet wrote:

But as you know, from Q1 '17, I'd like to cut loyalty payouts by about 33%, and use that money to fund the bonus shop.  The idea is that we give free bonus money to our biggest losing players, and I'd like to fund this pretty heavily.

---

Wow, cutting payouts by 33% from Q1 17  is a shocking news, with such big rake it would be very hard to play so much

[Andrew]

It will almost certainly make it easier to play.  On average, the players who lose the most each week will be the worst players.  They are not necessarily the highest rakers.  So by ensuring we're giving that money to the worst players, we're keeping them around a lot longer, which makes the games a lot softer.