It really is a game of skill. And that's killing the industry. The good players, with a big bankroll and computer support, can win. Everybody else is a sucker. Like the stock market. So the suckers are bailing.
Yeah, but in most games of skill you have some system in place to ensure your best players don't drive away the worst. When money gets involved things become murkier though.
Tell that to the person who logs onto League of Legends to see what the fuss is about, and is dinged with "l2p nub" -- and worse.
Good. I probably saw/heard their ads thousands of times (no exagg.) over a few month period. They annoyed me so much I wouldn't give them any business even if I found their product fun (which I didn't).
Change $190 to $500k and I think you just described venture capitalism!
But without the instant feedback and athleticism, which is why millennials aren't venture capitalists. That, and most don't have $500k.
"User acquisition cost" refers to the average amount a company spends on marketing to acquire one new user. It does not mean the price a user pays to sign up.
When you tie an arm around the "skilled" player's back, you can't justify claiming that what you do isn't gambling.
It's not about tying their arm behind their back, it's about putting skilled players against skilled players. In pretty much any skilled game you have rough tiers that people of similar skill level face eachother. In general, high school teams don't play against pro teams. And if they do, we don't call the high school team "suckers" if they lose.
The incentives are different. Gambling models that require a rake always have a sucker tier.
It really is a game of skill. And that's killing the industry. The good players, with a big bankroll and computer support, can win. Everybody else is a sucker. Like the stock market. So the suckers are bailing.
> The good players, with a big bankroll and computer support, can win. That's pretty much the key to winning on these. Whenever they interview a 'big winner' they all seem to do the same thing - play a bunch of picks for each bet to spread out their chances. This of course is not what the little guy does or can do. There's so much 'luck' involved that you have to spread it out to have any hope of any sort of consiste…
It's the same as the stock market, but with the guarantee that the Bata is always negative.
Publicly run gambling is interesting. I mean, a bookie is a bookie, but it seems a safer bet if your bookie is a publicly accountable institution.
Yes, also: profits from the operation are going to the state, which presumably puts them to better use than the local gangster.
Depends on how you look at it. Where I live the mobsters returned a much larger share of the betting as prizes, back when it was called the "numbers racket". The state doesn't actually get that much, but the company they hired to administer the lottery does.
I think what's missing here is that the product is sticky for a number of people and spending on user acquisition costs are likely to go down. Each company essentially takes a 10% rake on every game and I'd imagine these companies will be profitable in the long. I don't think legal issues will destroy these companies as it's really only a matter of time before sports gambling becomes legal across the US and New York…
> ... it's really only a matter of time before sports gambling becomes legal across the US and New York is already letting these companies continue to operate this year.
According to the article we're discussing, NY passed a bill, the Governor signed it into law, and both DraftKings and FanDuel started accepting NY customers again the following Monday.
I think what's missing here is that the product is sticky for a number of people and spending on user acquisition costs are likely to go down. Each company essentially takes a 10% rake on every game and I'd imagine these companies will be profitable in the long. I don't think legal issues will destroy these companies as it's really only a matter of time before sports gambling becomes legal across the US and New York…
> ... it's really only a matter of time before sports gambling becomes legal across the US and New York is already letting these companies continue to operate this year. According to the article we're discussing, NY passed a bill, the Governor signed it into law, and both DraftKings and FanDuel started accepting NY customers again the following Monday.
The wheels of power seem to move more smoothly back east.
I'm wondering why gambling(except for lotteries and casinos, etc.) was made illegal? Was it a 'we must protect people from themselves' type of law? Or a 'casinos have lobbied for protection of their business' type of law? Or 'this type of industry requires regulation but its too damn expensive to regulate' type of law? I say this as the guy who consistently makes fun of the lottery while also buying video game 'this…
It's a religion thing here in the US. Large Christian churches (Methodist for example) are against gambling on moral grounds, fight addictions, personal weakness, avarice, etc. Since money and an ability to get members to turn out to vote run everything in American politics, you end up with many states banning gambling on "moral grounds". About 8 years ago where I live they wanted to built a horse racing track and we…
It's something of a relic of the resurgence of Puritan-esque positions from the 2nd Great Awakening. You get the abolitionism and the women's rights, but you have to take the prohibition and the frowning and finger-shaking at anybody that's trying to enjoy themselves along with it.