Why PartyPoker's chip cap is right

PARTYPOKER recently announced a cap on the number of play money chips a player can acquire. At first glance this move may appear to be an unnecessary, Scrooge-like measure, but the idea actually has some merits.

First off, for whatever reason, many players desire to have as large of a play money chip balance as possible so they often chip dump between accounts, or even buy and sell accounts via secondary services like ChipEmpire.

Chip dumping hurts the game for everyone, and most poker rooms provide no policing of play money games. But buying and selling accounts is not only a violation of most room’s T&C’s (as is chip dumping), but could also be construed as providing value which could then be argued that play money gaming is actual gambling: which could put many rooms in hot water if a zealous attorney decided to pursue the matter.

It could also become problematic for poker rooms that rely heavily on the distinction between their .NET and .COM offerings. Many media partners have very strict rules regarding this separation of play and real money, and if it becomes common knowledge that there is a secondary market for play money chips, it could influence their decision on whether or not to accept advertising from poker sites.

PartyPoker’s decision to cap the number of play money chips a player can hold discourages both chip dumping and account selling while having a relatively minimal impact on players who simply wish to enjoy a game of poker without risking any cash.

Perhaps just as important is the fact that after 120 days, the conversion rate from play money to real money player drops to a number so low that it is effectively 0. Players using the play money system after 120 days are of near zero value to a poker room, so in effect they are simply an unnecessary cost to the business.

While it is easy to argue that the cost of supporting those players is minimal, it is still a cost. As competition heats up in the online poker sector, many poker rooms will be forced to look at the costs associated with maintaining their play money player base. They will need to either find a way to monetize those players or kick them off of the system.

This may be the first shot over the bow but won’t likely be the last we hear about poker rooms changing policies regarding play money players. After all, with 90%+ of poker players being in the red, poker rooms would be wise to start thinking of themselves as entertainment providers rather than as casinos.

Thoughts? EGR welcomes pitches for blog posts of 300-400 words on topical issues in egaming. Email online editor Jon Parker for details.