Party tries to compete with Stars tournies

[Boobie Lover]

If there is one thing that Party did right was that they never foolishly added nano-limit tables. Gamblers will keep reloading and playing, so there is no need to set up these tables unless the business running them wants less rake.

[jillaj]

But why keep people who want to pay you to play from doing so? It can't cost that much to have a few more tables that are low limits.

[Robbr25]

The main point with low limit tables is people tend to play BAD poker, so...
They lose a little at a time, but it becomes a lot in the long run.
Why does intertopspoker.com have
$10 + $1 SNG
and
$5 + $1 SNG
Because people many times can only afford the $5 + $1
and their profit margin is that much more.
Quantity of hands(and loose play) vs Expensive rake.

[BDMK]

i beg to differ somewhat.

the main value of the low/micro buyin tourneys (say roughly $1-$5) is actually twofold:

-allows firsttimers plenty of chances to create their first workable roll (u get up to 50 buyins on $1 vs 'only' 10 if the min buyin is $5)

-allows low/microrollers (who again i repeat are the overwhelming majority of all online poker players nowadays) to maintain/replenish their roll without redepositing too often for comfort, which runs the real risk of losing some, if not most of them to online poker for good, never mind the poker site in question

finally, what worked well for stars is more than obvious. to this day, their $1 SNGs (not even to mention the lowest limit cash games and/or other low buyin regular tourneys and such) have literally thousands, if not tens of thousands of ppl daily, esp in peak hrs. in fact, there are more players at this level on stars than there are total players on whole other sites combined!