Bodog and PokerScout Reignite Bitter Feud Over Traffic Data
With everything else going on, a relatively minor story emerged this past week. Bodog (with their US facing brand Bovada) moved ahead of Full Tilt on PokerScout.com’s traffic rankings.
The small amount of press this received should have been the end of it, but it led to a bigger story, as the years-old dispute between the two companies bubbled back to the surface, when CalvinAyre.com used the exposure and posted the following statement, requesting once again that PokerScout removes any statistical data on Bodog:
PokerScout relies wholly on accurate data so why would they carry data from companies they cannot measure? Carrying figures for Bodog simply undermines the credibility of their product as there is no way of estimating player numbers with anonymous tables.
Apart from the fact that this is confidential and proprietary information, carrying figures for companies like Bodog, surely, simply undermines their own business model.
Bodog once again ask that PokerScout remove statistics that are patently untrue unless, of course, they subscribe to the ethos of Vic Reeves that; “88.2% of statistics are made up on the spot.”
PokerScout claim they; “…actively track over 98% of all online poker traffic, and provides estimated liquidity statistics for the rest.” Why? It would be more sensible to publish only information they know is real rather than muddy their authority with absurd guesstimations?
This was later rebutted by Poker Scout on their Twitter account in the following series of tweets:
Bodog recently rose to 5th place, which may be why they again want to be removed from our rankings http://t.co/LrwZeLhOSq
— Poker Scout (@PokerScout1) September 23, 2014
Bodog is concerned about attention from DoJ. Understandable, but DoJ is probably smart enough to pick targets without our help.
— Poker Scout (@PokerScout1) September 23, 2014
We think public & industry want complete coverage of online poker, not just sites that opt in. Don't you?
— Poker Scout (@PokerScout1) September 23, 2014
So for those of you who are unaware what is going on here, let me try to shed some light on the issue. Let me also say that I have no dog in this fight, and can see both side’s points, so I’ll refrain from judgment.
The Ongoing Feud
First, everyone needs to understand this is not a new fight.
Bodog and Poker Scout have been at odds for a number of years, with the bad blood first boiling over in late 2011 when Calvin Ayre.com’s Bill Beatty posted an article accusing Poker Scout of profiting from false numbers and even overtly accusing PokerScout of extortion:
“It shouldn’t surprise any of you that we’re not fans of Dan Stewart, his site PokerScout.com and their business model of exploiting poker operator’s data without permission for profit. This dislike existed even before his extortion attempt of our friends over at Bodog Poker.
“Dan’s business model involves pilfering a poker operator’s proprietary data and profiting on it without permission. Even if he doesn’t have accurate data, he’ll still post and profit from the inaccurate and fictional numbers…”
The “extortion” Beatty cites allegedly happened soon after Black Friday, when Bodog asked to be removed from PokerScout’s traffic lists.
According to Beatty, PokerScout owner Dan Stewart informed the company they could be removed if they gave PokerScout a seven-figure payout.
“Bodog approached Dan Stewart to be removed from the listings. Dan Stewart thought about the request and offered to take Bodog off his site BUT only if they paid Stewart a seven figure extortion payment.
“This is an old school extortion racket by Stewart. He steals your data and uses it against your better interests in a money making scheme and if you don’t like it he needs over a million dollars to make your problem go away.”
When Bodog declined to pay, Poker Scout refused to stop tracking Bodog, with owner Dan Stewart issuing the following statement on the matter, which reads in part:
“Since the update, Bodog has been publishing disinformation and increasingly frantic attacks against PokerScout, mainly through its mouthpiece CalvinAyre website.
“Bodog asked to be completely removed from the PokerScout.com website shortly after Black Friday. This caused a dilemma, because we try to keep a cordial relationship with all online poker operators, but in the end we had no choice but to deny their request. Our duty to our readers to provide neutral and complete coverage of the market necessarily took precedence over the wishes of a single operator.”
Bodog makes things difficult
It should be noted that PokerScout.com provides an invaluable service to the poker world (especially to poker journalists like myself), as the site tracks online poker traffic around the globe, making general traffic numbers free to the public, and offering access to more detailed, historical reports to paid subscribers.
When Bodog’s recreational model was implemented it also had the secondary affect of thwarting PokerScout.com’s data collection, as Bodog’s Anonymous tables and their decision to hide full tables made accurate data collection virtually impossible.
This has led to PokerScout estimating Bodog’s traffic, which the site does for several operators and clearly indicates in their data. However, Bodog feels that since this data is inaccurate it should not be reported.
And so we were left with a game of cat and mouse, as Poker Scout attempts to collect data on Bodog while Bodog tries to foil them.
Why does Bodog want the data removed?
According to a spokesman for Bodog:
“The reasons for wanting removal are, in fact, very simple: PokerScout only attracts bum-hunters and that type of player is the exact opposite of what Bodog’s highly copied Recreational Poker Model is striving to appeal to. Also, with all-site anonymous tables, PokerScout can no more estimate cash players than any other type of player on the site so the information is, inevitably, inaccurate.”
Others have also pointed out that Bodog is an offshore site still operating in the U.S., but any unwanted attention they might receive from PokerScout seems to be insignificant, it’s not as if the DOJ is unaware of the company, considering they have gone after them before – Bodog is the DOJ’s symbolic white whale.
Why does Bodog think the data should be removed?
Bodog feels the data PokerScout.com uses is proprietary and belongs to each individual site. The fact that PokerScout then monetizes this data is the problem for Bodog.
The argument they are making is that what Poker Scout is engaged in would be similar to someone collecting historical income information for people in the country (with or without the person’s permission) and then monetizing that information.
It’s unclear if Bodog is more outraged by the collection of data, the guesstimating of data, the monetization of it, its conflict with the site’s Recreational Model, or the exposure it is bringing to the company, as they have made all of these arguments.
What is clear is that this is likely far from the last word we’ll hear on the matter.
Photo Credit: CalvinAyre.com
