What rule applies to revenue from players on your site? 80/20 or something else?

[MichaelCorfman]

Probably everyone knows the 80/20 rule - You get 80% of your revenue from 20% of your customers. Or 80% of your problems from 20% of the people you deal with. The ratio isn't always 80/20. Maybe you get 90% of your revenue from 10% of your customers.

In a recent post, bb1web pointed out that a few good players are better than lots of bonus hustlers. You can view the discussion in the thread www.gpwa.org/forum/learning-point-newbs-those-so-stuck-word-free-171975.html. The discussion in that thread is the inspiration for this weeks question.

What ratio applies to actual players from your site? Do 10% of your actual players generate 90% of your revenue? Or do 20% of your actual players generate 80% of your revenue? Share your experience with the rest of us.

Michael

[Doolally]

I've voted 90% of the income from 10% of the visitors/players. However, this only applies to the casino market.

Poker I would say is probably closer to 70/30.

[topboss]

I voted 70/30.
It was an interesting question and I had never really thought about it until now .
I am pretty lucky that I have quite a large loyal player base , especially in the South African market - but that may be due to the fact that there isn't as many casinos to choose from , so players don't hop around much

[WagerX]

I had no idea of the 80/20 rule. That's very close to what is happening on my sites.

It would be nice to know the dynamics of the 80% making the 20% profit. Do they convert to a member of the more profitable group, or do they stay in the low profit category?

What's the demographics of the more profitable group? Interesting to say the least.

[bb1web]

Hi all,

well I said this in the thread that Michael was so kind to point out.

but I will say here again I'd like to credit the Prof from CAP for making this point to me very early on.

he said I'd make majority of my money from a handful of players. I have to say he was so right.

Poker ... a different situation. since I have had trouble finding any quality poker program that i felt worthy of promoting.... I left it alone for the most part.

it seems most poker programs have predatory terms they are unwilling to change ... (fulltilt for one, AP another) .... and then throw in the fact you need a poker room that can meet the needs of having larger games available on a regular basis .... and I frankly am still searching for the right place to promote.

Poker has allowed rebate sites. IMHO an insult to us all. Where do we draw the line? Then throw in the fact that those that don't allow such tactics ..... cannot seem to gain a following that produces regular large stakes games ..... and then throw in the fact that those that might meet the above ... have predatory terms ...... quotas ....... which I will NEVER support ... because the fact always remains that you send a player .. especially a big one .... and then can't meet their quota ... you stand to lose that player that for instance .... in my case ... I have one.... that earns me a few hundred bucks a month .... you stand to lose them. If these places don't intend to use their predatory terms .... then why do they have them? The truth is .... they wouldn't have these players if we didn't send them.

no getting around this fact. and I am insulted that poker rooms say ... well we don't intend to use this term. B f#chin shit! there is simply no reason to have that term otherwise.

Don't pee down my leg and tell me its raining!

that's the truth of the matter and I encourage others to take this into their thoughts.

Its pretty simple to me. Give us credit for players we send. these places wouldn't have them otherwise. simple. to the point. and no getting around it or coloring it any other way.

[Nandakishore]

I have voted for 90%, although I don't have an exact statistic. It would be really interesting if the poll tends more towards a 50-50 ratio.

Nandakishore
Online Casino Newsroom

[MrKay]

I have gone for 98% because I have loads of regular poker players that bring in enough money for me to buy a beer or two each month and two great loyal casino players that pay my wages.

My stats are probably abnormally high because I obtained most of my poker players through advertising free poker chips and if these players do ever deposit then its normally a tiny amount.

[MichaelCorfman]

Originally Posted by Nandakishore

It would be really interesting if the poll tends more towards a 50-50 ratio.

That really never happens in practice for anything where there are a range of choices people can make. I'll give a simple example:

100 players spend $500
100 players spend $400
100 players spend $300
100 players spend $200
100 players spend $100

Even in this case where the distribution of how much money players spend is quite flat, 40% of the players provide 60% of the revenue.

The only way 50% of players can provide 50% of the revenue is if all of the players provide exactly the same amount of revenue.

Michael

[big fish]

i am going with 70/30... although its just an esitmate.

i know some bigger players come through that do some heavy hitting, but there are lots of average ones as well.

[Nandakishore]

Originally Posted by MichaelCorfman

Even in this case where the distribution of how much money players spend is quite flat, 40% of the players provide 60% of the revenue.

The only way 50% of players can provide 50% of the revenue is if all of the players provide exactly the same amount of revenue.

Michael

Well, when I said 'tends towards 50-50' I was actually thinking of 40%+ players providing more or less 60% of revenue. Let us see what this poll shows.

Nandakishore
Online Casino Newsroom