For the past few days, the online poker news world has been abuzz over a boycott of top online poker room PokerStars. PokerStars is usually in the news for tournament game play or events, but this week, the poker room has been highlighted for a less than positive reason. The boycott was led by poker player Dani Stern in response to the changes to the VIP program at PokerStars, which was announced only a short time ago.
The boycott was to take place from the 1st to the 3rd of December, with Stern requesting that players not take part in a poker hand at PokerStars during that time frame. As many as 2,500 players had announced they would be joining the cause, after recent changes were announced by Amaya Gaming in regards to the Supernova Elite program and the discontinuation of this rewards option. Stern started the boycott on TwoPlusTwo, calling for players to join in protest against the changes at PokerStars.
Stern asked players to stop taking part in any gaming at PokerStars for the three day time frame, stating they needed to show a demonstration of force, acting as one to make their voices heard. Stern felt that PokerStars made it clear they were not respecting the players and so the players needed to demonstrate that they have the option to fight back in volume and force.
The boycott was met with some ridicule as normally a boycott is done on a permanent basis. A three day time frame is not necessarily a long time to affect PokerStars in any way. One can also consider the boycott was not supported by top pros such as Daniel Negreanu or Bertrand Grospellier. Negreanu did speak out on the subject, only stating that he agrees with the changes, calling them ‘inevitable’ but also pointing out that PokerStars did not go about announcing the changes in a correct manner.
Now, after the boycott is finished, it seems as though the poker traffic numbers were not affected at PokerStars. Poker Scout shows steady numbers during the 1st to the 3rd with minimal fluctuations. Online poker room 888Poker did try to take advantage of the boycott by hosting enticing events during the time frame. Rake was cut by 50% for specific games while the guaranteed events had a bump in price money guarantees.
It seems as though Stern and his supporters may have overestimated the power of the boycott at PokerStars. Players who may have been considering being part of the boycott had to choose to continue to make money at PokerStars or to log offline for a few days. In most cases, players will choose to continue to make money. The time frame of the boycott as well as scale was not enough to affect PokerStars in the slightest. However, PokerStars does listen to their players to it will be interesting to see if the site decides to make any more changes to try and appeal to the players affected.
Stern stated on TwoPlusTwo that he did not expect to take down the company during the three day strike but wanted to show a display of power. It does not seem that he was effective in doing so. Perhaps if the player numbers had been on the 5 figure side, then PokerStars would have seen a great affect in regards to what the strike was able to do. Will players continue to try and show their distaste of the VIP changes or will players accept the changes PokerStars put in place and move on to continue game play? Perhaps some may find a new home, one that offers better rewards now that PokerStars is moving away from catering to the pro and more towards recreational players.