Exclusive: iPoker licensees demand answers over proposed network split

Several operators with poker offerings on the 46-skin iPoker network will demand showdown talks with the Playtech-owned business over its plans to ring-fence cash tables from a select group of skins.

Multiple sources have confirmed to eGaming Review that bet365, Paddy Power, Titan Poker, William Hill and Poker 770 will be on the ring-fenced network, known anecdotally as ‘iPoker 2’.

Under the new framework, which could come into force as soon as next month, exclusive cash tables would be created on those skins included in the higher-tier of the network, between whom liquidity would be pooled. Bet365 and Paddy Power already have exclusive tables at low levels, but the new format is expected to extend across all cash tables on the relevant skins. iPoker is the world’s largest poker network and the third largest brand behind PokerStars and PartyPoker with average 24-hour peak liquidity of more than 7,000 online players, according to Poker Scout.

According to representatives from more than one of the operators excluded from iPoker 2, those set to be included could ultimately account for as much as 70% of cash game liquidity across the network. “Cash liquidity is roughly 65-35 in favour of the skins set to be on iPoker 2 but if Poker770 join then that goes above 70%,” said one representative, who asked not to be named.

Among the larger skins to be excluded from iPoker 2 are Expekt and BoylePoker, with the latter understood to be upset at the failure of Playtech representatives to mention the planned split in meetings between the two parties.

A senior representative for a non sportsbook iPoker skin that has been on the network for several years told eGR that if Playtech segregated liquidity in this way his company would look to enforce its contractual rights, take steps to migrate its offering and even report it to the Alderney Gambling Control Commission for breach of contract.

“As a non sportsbook we would expect not to be in the major, but in the minor room. Players would quickly become frustrated from being on a smaller room and inevitably move to the major room,” he said.

“Unless you’re a major UK sportsbook [on iPoker] Playtech aren’t interested in you. If you’re thinking of moving to Playtech then think about what problems you might encounter in the future ““ you should always assume there will be a transition.

In mid 2005 PartyGaming ring-fenced its own players from some of its partners excluding namely Empire Poker only to see its higher raking players leave to move to PartyPoker where liquidity was far higher. In December that year Empire Online began legal proceedings against Party. In early 2006 the two companies announced a US$250m settlement deal with Party agreeing to acquire Empire’s skin operations, and Empire dropping the suit.

He is not the only one who believes legal action could follow, with a senior representative from another skin explaining: “Another question is whether the skins will be able to sue for breach of contract if they don’t get accepted onto iPoker 2, or whether Playtech might be in a position to take legal action to stop them leaving.”

The same representative suggested: “When it comes to some of the larger skins left off iPoker 2, I don’t think they will waste much time in leaving if this does happen.

“However I’m not sure how keen other networks such as Microgaming or Ongame would be on damaging their own ecology by bringing in sites which have a high number of rakeback players,” he added.

Expekt is one of the larger rooms believed to be considering its options, and may be tempted join its fellow Betclic Everest brands on the Everest Poker platform after being shunned by Playtech. The Betclic brand moved to Everest’s platform in September.

Other skins are known to be considering their options, although the CEO of one operator with a smaller iPoker skin suggested that if tournament liquidity is not ring-fenced that could be enough to convince smaller skins to stay.

“I don’t think tournament poker will be affected by the split, and with cash there’s still maybe the opportunity for innovation to attract players who have been on bet365 or William Hill up until now,” he said.

One high volume poker affiliate expressed his surprise that Playtech seemed unlikely to wait for the fallout from an alleged similar move from the Ongame network before initiating the split. According to poker blog site PokerQ4, some of the larger Ongame network skins including Betsson, Betfair and Betsafe have formed a ring-fenced network.

“I don’t see why they don’t wait a couple of months to see what Ongame does and whether that’s successful ““ it’s a free test model for them,” the affiliate explained.

Sources within Ongame confirmed that the ring-fencing of liquidity “has been around for many years, and the work has been continuing this year”, but would not be drawn on which rooms enjoyed segregated tables at this stage.

Gil Rotem, head of gaming operations at bet365, that has outsourced its poker, casino and bingo to Playtech for many years and is one of its biggest customers, told eGR it had ringfenced its lower stake tables for a “few months”.

“We never promoted it heavily to the players ““ from their point of view it was seamless and we saw good results. Our players are enjoying a longer time on the table. The type of traffic we have is very loose, its recreational players playing against one another.

“If everyone ever checked our rewards or loyalty plans, they’re not as aggressive others. We’re strongly against rakeback and affiliate deals. We really believe that players want to play poker and by rewarding them by playing with fish. You can make money from that and not 75% rakeback.

“There’s not one player on rakeback deal on Bet365, we’ve been very loud about it for many years. The reason we ringfenced is that we’re probably the only company that really stands behind what we say. We’re against rakeback and we don’t think it’s good for poker,” he added.

Playtech was unavailable for comment.