|
|
 |
June 15, 2005
Why a poker website is bigger than British Airways

Over in the UK, a poker site named PartyGaming is about to go public. No big shock there -- except that if the company hits its expected first-day price, it will instantly be worth $10 billion, slightly less than Marks and Spencer, and more than British Airways and EMI put together. Why? Because in the last three years, its pretax profits have risen from from $5.8 million to $372 million, and it's currently pulling in about $58,000 an hour. The business plan is simple: It lets people play poker together online, and shaves a tiny 1% off of each pot.
The company was founded by a woman who'd made her fortune in online porn, who hired a 25-year-old kid fresh out of an Indian comp-sci program to write her software. That's surreal enough, but my favorite detail about the company, as reported in The Guardian, is this:
PartyGaming's head office is in Gibraltar; its computer servers run from there and from Kahnawake, a Mohawk Indian reserve within Canada; its marketing office is in London but most of its 1,000 staff work in a call centre and software development site in Hyderabad, southern India.
Man alive. Porn, call-service-centers, Canadian Indian reserves -- it's like the wireframe model for a sci-fi novel cowritten by Cory Doctorow and Thomas Friedman.
As an unrelated aside, I wonder whether the rise of poker is a permanent new fixture in global culture, or a short-term bubble. I don't actually play poker, and I don't find it interesting to watch. But ludologically, I'm fascinated by the ascendance of games in today's pop culture -- a category that, judging by the popularity of poker, goes quite beyond videogames, and now includes competitive reality TV. Skill-based games have always been huge, of course; pro sports have been around for centuries. But the skills celebrated in today's newly rising games aren't about physical achievement so much as more about cunning, bluffing, and Victorian subterfuge -- it's like a world gladiatorial culture designed by Jane Austen.
(Thanks to F!LTER magazine for this one!)
Posted by Clive Thompson at June 15, 2005 01:49 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.collisiondetection.net/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1246
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why a poker website is bigger than British Airways:
I've wondered the same thing about poker recently. I suspect the recent rise of poker may have come from a few movies, namely Rounders; after all, why is it that Texas Hold'em is so popular in particular - it isn't simply that poker is popular. But the other reason is probably the very presence of these on-line playing rooms. Add the addictive qualities of a computer (game) to the already addictive qualities of gambling, and voila! If that movie had been popular in say the 1970s, or if recent advent of these on-line poker rooms didn't come with some mainstream popular force driving an interest, maybe it wouldn't have taken off quite as it has. Whether it's hear to stay, I don't know. I've been waiting for a decade for hip-hop to go away, but that seems to be a cultural mainstay as well.
Posted by: Steve E. at June 15, 2005 12:39 PM
I've never seen Rounders! I gotta check it out.
Posted by: Clive at June 15, 2005 1:00 PM
Well, Texas Hold 'Em itself is no mystery; Hold 'Em is popular because poker is popular. Long before any sort of mainstream popularity, Hold 'Em was the hands-down (too lazy to look it up, but I'll put down 40 bucks that says that's a poker lending) game of choice for the majority of poker experts and afficianados. After all, it's been the main game at the World Series for just about ever. I remember before the most recent poker boom, hearing people talk about Hold 'Em as the most sophisticated and skill-demanding even as I didn't know how to play anything other than 5-card draw. So it stands to reason that if you're going to publicize and televize professional poker, the game which the vast majority of professional poker players play the most is going to be the variant to achieve popularity.
And speaking of the World Series of poker should remind one that that poker has actually been on the rise for a while now; poker in America has experienced three or four growth spurts or large bumps; the current one is, of course, orders of magnitude greater than any of the previous ones.
I'd suspect that poker's popularity will be slightly more enduring than some other fads if only because, at least in my very limited and anecdotal experience, there was already a sizeable base of people who knew how to play poker or enjoyed it or played it in groups once every couple of weeks. Card players have been one of the ultimate paradigms of cool for at least 150 years now, and that certainly ain't gonna change any time soon. Also: gambling. People love to think they can make money by playing a game, especially one that doesn't require any physical talent. Mix that in with the fact that lots of people are convinced that 'poker is all about psychology' (ie not math), and you've got yourself a national pastime.
Posted by: Z.D. Smith at June 15, 2005 1:38 PM
Piers Anthony wrote a series of books that featured a society that revolved around games (the Apprentice Adept series), in which the skills tested range from the physical to sheer luck, passing through subterfuge, bluffing, manual dexterity, etc., where the most proficient competitors ended up in large-scale stadium-style contests...sort of a world gladiatorial culture designed by Mark Burnett with Boris Spassky, Abner Doubleday and, yes, Jane Austen advising.
I think there were talking horses, too -- so, you know, grain of salt.
Posted by: braine at June 15, 2005 1:50 PM
ZD, yeah, that pretty much sums it up: Poker is simply a damn cool game, which ought to keep it in the public eye for a long time. I should point out that while I'm not interested in watching it on TV, I love the fact that is is now broadcast widely -- it's such an inherently, gorgeously untelevisable activity that it violates all the dumbing-down rules that critics throw at TV. In his otherwise excellent book Amusing Ourselves To Death, Neil Postman argued that because it's an internal process with few exterior markers of activity, it is unallowable on news TV to show someone in the act of thinking. Poker, however, is almost nothing but people sitting there thinking. Very cool.
Braine, I gotta see those books!
Posted by: Clive at June 15, 2005 2:42 PM
When I was young we used to have a childrens chess program on tv called 'Play Chess' (http://tv.cream.org/a-z/pq/p2.htm) , the perfect excuse to go outside and enjoy the sunshine.
On poker's popularity; I've noticed quite a few board game designers siting poker as their favourite game recently which has encouraged me to give it a go, last time I played was in Sierra's Police Quest when I was 10.
Posted by: tomp at June 16, 2005 4:49 AM
It was more ESPN's broadcast of the 2003 World Series of Poker that did it. Chris Moneymaker ended up winning a few million after winning his $10,000 entry with just a $40 tournament online. I imagine that created the internet boom.
I played poker all my life, primarily with my cousins when we'd go camping and I never even heard of Texas Hold 'Em until I saw it on ESPN. It's simply the best poker game. A game like 5 Card Draw doesn't give up any information (no cards are showing), Hold 'Em has the perfect balance of public cards and hidden (your hole cards).
Posted by: Mark at June 19, 2005 10:48 PM
Post a comment
| | |
I've wondered the same thing about poker recently. I suspect the recent rise of poker may have come from a few movies, namely Rounders; after all, why is it that Texas Hold'em is so popular in particular - it isn't simply that poker is popular. But the other reason is probably the very presence of these on-line playing rooms. Add the addictive qualities of a computer (game) to the already addictive qualities of gambling, and voila! If that movie had been popular in say the 1970s, or if recent advent of these on-line poker rooms didn't come with some mainstream popular force driving an interest, maybe it wouldn't have taken off quite as it has. Whether it's hear to stay, I don't know. I've been waiting for a decade for hip-hop to go away, but that seems to be a cultural mainstay as well.
Posted by: Steve E.
at June 15, 2005 12:39 PM
I've never seen Rounders! I gotta check it out.
Posted by: Clive
at June 15, 2005 1:00 PM
Well, Texas Hold 'Em itself is no mystery; Hold 'Em is popular because poker is popular. Long before any sort of mainstream popularity, Hold 'Em was the hands-down (too lazy to look it up, but I'll put down 40 bucks that says that's a poker lending) game of choice for the majority of poker experts and afficianados. After all, it's been the main game at the World Series for just about ever. I remember before the most recent poker boom, hearing people talk about Hold 'Em as the most sophisticated and skill-demanding even as I didn't know how to play anything other than 5-card draw. So it stands to reason that if you're going to publicize and televize professional poker, the game which the vast majority of professional poker players play the most is going to be the variant to achieve popularity.
And speaking of the World Series of poker should remind one that that poker has actually been on the rise for a while now; poker in America has experienced three or four growth spurts or large bumps; the current one is, of course, orders of magnitude greater than any of the previous ones.
I'd suspect that poker's popularity will be slightly more enduring than some other fads if only because, at least in my very limited and anecdotal experience, there was already a sizeable base of people who knew how to play poker or enjoyed it or played it in groups once every couple of weeks. Card players have been one of the ultimate paradigms of cool for at least 150 years now, and that certainly ain't gonna change any time soon. Also: gambling. People love to think they can make money by playing a game, especially one that doesn't require any physical talent. Mix that in with the fact that lots of people are convinced that 'poker is all about psychology' (ie not math), and you've got yourself a national pastime.
Posted by: Z.D. Smith
at June 15, 2005 1:38 PM
Piers Anthony wrote a series of books that featured a society that revolved around games (the Apprentice Adept series), in which the skills tested range from the physical to sheer luck, passing through subterfuge, bluffing, manual dexterity, etc., where the most proficient competitors ended up in large-scale stadium-style contests...sort of a world gladiatorial culture designed by Mark Burnett with Boris Spassky, Abner Doubleday and, yes, Jane Austen advising.
I think there were talking horses, too -- so, you know, grain of salt.
Posted by: braine
at June 15, 2005 1:50 PM
ZD, yeah, that pretty much sums it up: Poker is simply a damn cool game, which ought to keep it in the public eye for a long time. I should point out that while I'm not interested in watching it on TV, I love the fact that is is now broadcast widely -- it's such an inherently, gorgeously untelevisable activity that it violates all the dumbing-down rules that critics throw at TV. In his otherwise excellent book Amusing Ourselves To Death, Neil Postman argued that because it's an internal process with few exterior markers of activity, it is unallowable on news TV to show someone in the act of thinking. Poker, however, is almost nothing but people sitting there thinking. Very cool.
Braine, I gotta see those books!
Posted by: Clive
at June 15, 2005 2:42 PM
When I was young we used to have a childrens chess program on tv called 'Play Chess' (http://tv.cream.org/a-z/pq/p2.htm) , the perfect excuse to go outside and enjoy the sunshine.
On poker's popularity; I've noticed quite a few board game designers siting poker as their favourite game recently which has encouraged me to give it a go, last time I played was in Sierra's Police Quest when I was 10.
Posted by: tomp
at June 16, 2005 4:49 AM
It was more ESPN's broadcast of the 2003 World Series of Poker that did it. Chris Moneymaker ended up winning a few million after winning his $10,000 entry with just a $40 tournament online. I imagine that created the internet boom.
I played poker all my life, primarily with my cousins when we'd go camping and I never even heard of Texas Hold 'Em until I saw it on ESPN. It's simply the best poker game. A game like 5 Card Draw doesn't give up any information (no cards are showing), Hold 'Em has the perfect balance of public cards and hidden (your hole cards).
Posted by: Mark
at June 19, 2005 10:48 PM