Boulder Station Buffets appear to be going, going, gone

My spouse lured me to Boulder Station tonight with an offer to use her points to buy us dinner at the Broiler. Before the pandemic, we enjoyed the 1960s Vegas atmosphere at this locals casino steakhouse. One great feature of the restaurant was its salad bar, which included two kinds of soup, appetizer-like salads such as shrimp and fake crab, and fruit. We would often order just entrees and maybe a side to share, filling in the meal with trips to the salad bar.

Not surprisingly, we found the salad bar closed. I didn't ask whether it's coming back, but my guess is that it won't. I figure they will be able to sell an average of at least one appetizer, salad or dessert per person as a result of the salad bar being gone, for an average of  $10 additional per person. Maybe they'll lose some customers, but where are those people going to go? I think the loss in patronage will be minimal and that, overall, they will come out ahead. Over time, the salad bar will fade from memory, and any negative effects of its elimination will shrink to zero.

Like most other Vegas casinos, Boulder also had a buffet restaurant, which seemed to be very popular. It was nicely remodeled a few years ago. My recollection is that the regular dinner price before rhe pandemic was $10 or $11, plus $1 or $2 on Fridays and Saturdays, which were barbeque nights. Lunch was a couple of bucks less than the regular dinner, and breakfast $1 or $2 less than that. Members of the players club got discounts of up to 50 percent when paying with points, depending on card level. Those with higher-tier player cards were able to use a special line, with little or no wait to get in.

As for the food, the main attractions were variety and quanitity, though the quality was more than acceptable, especially for the price.

The Las Vegas Advisor recently reported that an executive of Stations' parent company, Red Rock Resorts had told a stock analyst that the company would not be reopening any "money losing" buffets at its properties. It was unclear whether that meant the buffets at all Station casinos, but my guess is that it did.

At Boulder, there were signs advertising the new food court, which pictures made clear was going in to what had been the buffet. The buffet itself was completely walled off, indicating constuction coming soon or under way.

A food court, which Boulder does not already have, is a logical use for the buffet area because of the large central seating area and multiple food preparation stations around the perimeter. It also offers the freedom of people dining together to eat different types of food, and a relatively short dining time. A food court also offers the casino the option of outsourcing one more aspect of its operation.

It will be interesting to see how customers react to this change. I guess it will depend in part on the execution, but I don't think the concept will be popular. How many people go to the mall to eat at the food court? Since the Chuck Wagon at El Rancho Vegas, the first casino on the Strip, buffets have become an expected part of the casino experience. Only one locals casino -- South Point -- has reopened its buffet, and the lines have been double or more the longest I saw before the pandemic. I would not be surprised if more buffets come back, due to popular demand.

The closing of the buffets, ostensibly "because of covid" (the new all-purpose excuse for cuts in amenities and lousy service) is also the result of two secular trends in the casino business -- giving the customer less value and insisting that every part of casino operations be a "profit center." As for the latter, I don't have an MBA like many casino executives today, but it seems to me that if someone comes to your casino to eat at the buffet and that costs you a few bucks, if he stays for a while and gambles, the house is usually going to come out ahead. Yet for some reason it's more important not to lose that $5. Maybe they think he'll eat at another restaurant where the casino can make a profit, but that is not necessarily going to happen.

I don't know how much Boulder Station was losing on its buffet, but I think it was more than it had to. If it were open now, they could at least try to raise the price since none of the other casinos on the Boulder Strip has an open buffet. Also, in my opinion, many buffet discounts have been wasted. As a high-tier player club member, I always had more points than I could use for buffets or other types of comps. I did not need a 50 percent discount. A couple of dollars off would have made me feel appreciated enough. The important thing to me was not having to wait on line, which the casino can give me at virtually no cost. Eliminating buffets before even trying to squeeze more money out of then seems to be classic throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I hesitate to draw any conclusions based on one visit, but the crowd at Boulder Station tonight seemed to about half of what was typical on a Saturday night before the pandemic. One reason we went was to see if they had any promotions such as drawings going on; as best as we could find out, there weren't (except for a bingo promotion).

 I don't know if this affected tonight's patronage, but Stations cut the effective value of its slot points during the pandemic to one-sixth (!) of what they were. Most people aren't going to do the math to figure that out, but eventually they will realize that they're coming up short of the points they need to eat at the casino as often as before, especially if the absence of a buffet forces them into restaurants where they will have to pay twice to four times what they used to spend.

 

 

After the pandemic

 The Covid pandemic pretty much ended my gambling career, which I had been winding down anyway. I stayed away from the casinos almost completely for more than a year because of the reckless conditions under which they reopened. Allowing people to chainsmoke and drink while playing pretty much obviates any protection provided by a mask mandate.

Undoubtedly, the casinos took a big hit from the pandemic. They reacted largely by cutting players' benefits and promotions, which hasn't hurt the bottom line, at least yet. The casinos are benefitting from pent-up demand, which probably won't last forever, especially if people feel that they have been taken advantage of, which is happening throughout Vegas. My advice to prospective visitors is to avoid long lines, lousy service, high prices and continuing closures by staying away for at least six months. Sorry, Convention and Visitors Bureau.

I have been back to a few locals casinos and taken a couple of trips in the past month or so in my new role as a recreational gambler (but still interested in making a little money). 

Most of the casinos in Vegas are no longer mailing me offers, and have cut their benefits to the point where there's no reason to play there. The major exception is South Point, which had a decent promotion in June and was very busy throughout the month. South Point is the only locals' casino with an open buffet, which I would have loved to eat at, but the lines were consistently too long for me to bother with. Whether other locals casinos will reopen their buffets is a matter of much speculation (and trepidation). It's clear they don't want to, but I think some will be forced to by popular demand. I hope so, anyway.

My spouse and I got some good offers from the Eldorado in Reno and Harrah's/Harveys Lake Tahoe. We booked a trip and hit the road a day after the high temperature in Vegas reached 117 degrees. Eldorado recently merged its player rewards system into Caesars Rewards, and it was a disaster. There was no communication at either the Eldo or Harrah's/Harveys on how to use our offers, engendering frustration in casino employees as well as us. Basically, no one knew anything. It is hard to imagine a bigger management failure.

In Reno and Tahoe, as well as Vegas, restaurants and other amenities were limited. The buffets at Eldorado and Harrah's were both closed, with no indication that they'll reopen. The Eldo's buffet is one of the best anywhere, and I looked forward to hitting it immediately upon arrival during prepandemic trips.

Everything about the Caesars system is complex and often frustrating from the players' point of view. I was hoping that since Eldorado bought Caesars, the latter would become more like the former, but it looks as if the opposite is going to be the case.

We just got back from another trip, this one to two casinos in Southern California, Pechanga and Pala. We had been to both before the pandemic and got generous offers from them, particular Pala. Pala's offers ran out just before we were able to visit, but we had free roooms, free play and dining at Pechanga. We decided to spend a couple of nights there and play at Pala as well, in hope of restarting the freeplay gravy train.

We were very impressed by Pechanga, a beautiful resort nestled among mountains and with a casino bigger than any in Vegas, including the MGM Grand's. And it's all nonsmoking! We played $5 NSU deuces wild, which is no longer available in Vegas (only one place I know of, South Point, has even $2 NSU).

We found freeplay and dining credits easy to use. Dining credits were accepted everyplace we ate, including the food court and coffee place. There was a swipe card promotion on Tuesday, which awarded $150 in freeplay to my spouse and $125 to me. In Vegas, this type of promotion has ususlly been worth about $5 to us. The only negative is no free alcoholic beverages for players, which was also the case at Pala. I'll gladly trade that for a smoke-free casino!

Pala also had $5 NSU but I played another game there, $2 9/6 jacks or better Super Times Play. I had never seen STP, which adds more than 0.2 percent to the underlying game, on anything better than 8/5 bonus poker, and the ones I used to play in Vegas are long gone. I had an exceptional afternoon at Pala, hitting a 4-of-a-kind with a 4x multiplier for $2,000 and a straight flush with a 10x multiplier for $5,000. My total take was $8,700! We'll see if I get any more of their generous freeplay offers.

In my opinion, anyone wanting a relaxing vacation at a first-class resort hotel would be at least as happy at Pechanga as at Red Rock, the M or the J.W. Marriott in Vegas.

Somebody's going to get fired for this

The Downtown Grand is a casino a long block from Fremont Street, the center of the action in downtown Las Vegas. Formerly the Lady Luck, the property has been nicely renovated and contains a small but attractive casino. I was no-mailed there a few years ago and haven't played there since -- until this week.

One of the players at a locals' casino told my spouse the DTG had put in lots of full-pay video poker games, including full pay deuces wild, at denominations up to $2. We went there Tuesday, expecting to be disappointed, but we were not. Just about every video poker machine in the casino had been programmed with all full-pay games at denominations up to $2. The only bad news was that stickers on the machines disclosed that points are not earned on video poker.

The games offered were the best generally available versions (that's the definition of "full pay") of bonus poker, bonus poker deluxe, deuces wild bonus poker, double bonus poker, double double bonus poker, triple double bonus poker and deuces wild poker. Some of these games pay back an average of more than 100 percent over time with optimum play and maximum coins bet. Some, like bonus poker, pay back less -- in this case 99.17 percent. Even the games paying back just over 100 percent -- and certainly those paying less -- are in my opinion not worth playing if you're not getting any free play, comps or cash back.

But one of these games is very much worth playing. Full-pay deuces wild pays back 100.76 percent. At a moderately fast 800 hands per hour, a player can run $8,000 an hour through a $2 machine. Multiply that by the 0.76 player edge and you get a profit of more than $56 an hour.

Years ago, full-pay deuces was widely available in Vegas in all denominations, but since I started playing a dozen years ago, it has been found almost exclusively at quarters and nickels, at a shrinking number of locals' casinos. I last saw it for dollars about 10 years ago. My spouse was playing at Red Rock Resort and learned from a player there that Arizona Charlie's Boulder had put in $1 full pay deuces. We went there and found two big banks of machines, a total of about 15 in my recollection, with the elusive pay table. Nothing advertised the machines as offering anything special, and most of them went unplayed during the three or four weeks we hit them hard.

We never could figure out why Arizona Charlie's put the game in, and the motivation of the DTG is equally obscure. Most casinos that have 100 percent payback games use them like a supermarket uses loss leaders (although they probably do make some money because many players fail to use optimum strategy and some play short-coin). The machines usually have special glass or signs identifying them as offering 100 percent payback, and usually there aren't that many of them. And limiting the best games to quarters or less makes them unattractive to video poker professionals. At quarters, even full pay deuces pays only a little over the minimum wage.

The DTG did three big things wrong with its new video poker program. First, it put the full-pay games on almost every machine in the casino, including those at the large central bar. That leaves no bad video poker for the masses, most of whom are blissfully ignorant of pay tables and happy to pay whatever garbage they come across. It's a video poker truism that the bad games and bad players make the relatively few good games demanded by good players possible.

Second, it failed to market the new games to the public and thereby attract the kind of player it can make money off of. There should be signs on the machines and outside the casino; I saw none this week. As a result, word of the new games spread through the advantage player community, resulting in lots of play of the $2 full pay deuces, the worst game for the casino.

Third, the DTG did not have to go all the way to $2 to draw players to its full pay deuces games. $1 would have created almost as much excitement and  cut the casino's risk considerably, as well as eliminating the burden on employees of making hand pays to players hitting four deuces on the $2 game. Even offering full pay deuces at 50 cents would have drawn business from the locals' casinos where it's offered at no higher than quarters. Even offering the game at quarters would have drawn business from other downtown casinos, none of which offer the game at all.

It's unclear how long the $2 games at the DTG will last; my guess is that when the results for this month come in, the games will come out, alienating players, damaging the casino's reputation and leaving it with the task of devising a new video poker program. What the DTG is offering is great for players now, but too good to be true for very long.

A different way to pay a jackpot

The first time I hit a hand-pay jackpot at Harrah's Lake Tahoe, I was asked if I would like it all in cash. "What are my other options?" I asked, having never been offered any before. I had taken payment of some large jackpots in the form of a check, but I had to ask.

At Harrah's they will give you slot tickets instead, in about same amount of time as it takes to get cash. Today I hit an $8,000 jackpot at Tahoe. I asked for $2,000 to be withheld for taxes and the rest to be paid in six $1,000 tickets. These will take up a lot less room in my wallet than the 60 $100 bills I would have gotten.

Before going for this option, I wanted to be sure of one thing: that if I didn't use all the tickets, I could convert what was left to cash. I was concerned about this because the free play on slot tickets Caesars Entertainment properties give for promotional pruposes must be played through at least once (in my experience, this is the universal policy concerning free play in whatever form). I was assured I would have no trouble cashing in any unused tickets.

So basically the tickets are the same as cash except that they have an expiration date, in this case May 11. I will cash out any that I don't use at the end of trip here and be "stuck" at that point with cash.

There are times I would prefer a jackpot to be paid by check, especially if the amount is more than $10,000. It is obviously safer as well as more convenient to carry a check for a large amount; no reports to federal authorities generated when you deposit a check in the bank; and it is unlikely that a check would be seized by the police as part of a forfeiture action. The problem with gettting a casino to write you a check is that it is a complicated and time-consuming procedure. In my limited experience, a 40-minute wait is about average.

I would ask for a check for most jackpots over $10,000, but for payoffs of $4,000 or $8,000 (the amounts for royal flushes in $1 and $2 video poker with full coin bet) I would ask for slot tickets unless I was running low on cash. (I was told you can get paid partly in tickets and partly in cash.)

My spouse thinks Rio in Las Vegas has offered the same option, so it might be available at other Caesars properties. If it isn't offered, I would ask about it.

Thank you, South Point

South Point is a huge locals' casino on Las Vegas Boulevard south of where that road becomes the Strip. It's owned by one guy, Michael Gaughan, rather than a big corporation. And in most ways, that's a very good thing.

Mr. Gaughan is the son of the lengendary Jackie Gaughan, long-time owner of El Cortez, one of the oldest casinos in downtown Las Vegas. Michael got his start with the Barbary Coast, which is now the Cromwell at Flamingo Road and the Strip. The profits from that venture allowed him to build the Gold Coast, the Orleans, the Suncoast and the South Coast, now South Point.

That group of casinos was bought by Boyd Gaming, a major publicly traded corporation. The geniuses at Boyd decided they didn't want the South Coast, in part because there was no Interstate 15 interchange at the cross street it's on, Silverado Ranch Road. So they sold the South Coast back to Mr. Gaughan. The interchange was built a couple of years later and the casino continues Michael's record of success in bringing in the crowds.

South Point is one of the places I play regularly. The main attraction is 16/10 "not so ugly" deuces wild, which is available in denominations up to $2. At most other casinos that have this 99.7 percent payback game, the most you can play it for is dollars. Points at South Point are worth a competitive 0.3 percent (1,000 points = $3). Double points on video poker (and higher multipliers on reel slots) are offered on average about once a month, with no limit on points you can earn. (But don't play only on point multiplier days or you might find that your players card no longer works.)

This month (January 2017) South Point offered a great promotion. It's similar to ones offered before, so I would expect to see it again, possibly with modification. Here's how it worked:

Each Sunday, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, players earning 500 points on reel slots or 2,000 points on video poker ($1 coin in = 1 point) would get a virtual wheel spin for prizes ranging from $5 to $100 in free play or 2,500 to 100,000 players club points, worth from $7.50 to $300. Players could earn up to four spins each day of the promotion.

One nice thing was that the virtual wheel appeared when the required points were earned right on the little screen showing points earned. You pushed a button, the wheel spun, and the prizes were added to your account. Free play could be used immediately.

From my own and my spouse's experience, the prizes were worth an average of about $10 a spin. (It's possible that the wheel was weighted differently for different players.) Because the game we were playing was break even with base points earned (99.7 percent payback plus players club points worth 0.3 percent), this meant a profit of $40 each day of the promotion or $160 a week. On the $2 deuces, earning the four spins took about an hour (and actually required less than $7,500 coin in, not the $8,000 specified).

The wheel was definitely weighted toward the lower prizes. My spouse once got $50 free play, and we got $25 a few times. Most point prizes were 2,500 but 5,000 came up pretty often, with a few 10,000s. But here's the great thing: Neither one of us got the lowest prize, $5 free play, even once. We've been conditioned by experience in casino promotions to get the least valuable prize the vast majority of the time. Pleasantly surprising your customer is a marketing technique rarely practiced in such an across-the-board fashion anymore.

Today's mail brought a final "prize" in January's promotion -- a crazy good February mailer resulting from all the play I put in during the month. My January mailer gave me $10 a week in free play, one $15 dining credit, a two-for-one breakfast or lunch buffet and 25 percent off show tickets. For February I'm getting $50 a week in free play, one $150 dining credit plus a $75 credit for the Mexican restaurant, two free buffets and two free show tickets. Woo-hoo!

End-of-year thoughts

"It's getting tough to make a living," I said to the video poker player in the chair next to mine. His laugh showed that he appreciated the joke, but what was gallows humor to him was, to me, a simple statement of fact.

Unless I have a hell of a day today (12/31), I will make only about two-thirds of my average annual income for the past half-dozen or so years. In the past, I would have taken this in stride, gambling being characterized by ups and downs. But now I'm pretty well convinced this is the new normal for what I've been doing.

Most of what I have been doing is playing video poker. In the past few years, games have gotten worse, my mail offers from several casinos have been cut off, and ancillary earning opportunities, such as invitational tournanents and drawings, are not what they used to be. My other game, blackjack, hasn't changed as much, but there are fewer places where I'm allowed to play.

And, I'm tired. Gambling professionally is a notoriously time-consuming pursuit. I've basically been working seven days a week for the past several years. It is not as enjoyable as it used to be.

I've thought about doing other things, inside and outside the casino. A guy I used to work with makes his living betting golf, I sport I enjoy watching. I've done a little research on this and it seems hard, but it might be worth pursuing. I've also thought about playing more blackjack for as long as I can get away with it. And I've considered taking up live poker.

I've also thought about getting a job, but there are problems with that. What's left of the profession I worked in has changed a lot, and not in any good ways. I've been out of the job market entirely for half a dozen years.

I would like to to do more writing and have a concept for a book about my experiences in Las Vegas.

I'm going to be travelling for a few days early in the new year. I've got a lot to think about while I'm gone. Things have got to start changing when I get back. At this point, I'm just not sure how.

A better way to run a slot tournament

In the casino world, a tournament is an event that gives players an opportunity to compete against one another for a flat entry fee or on the casino's dime. Tournament formats include just about all the major casino games, including slots, live poker, video poker, blackjack, craps and other table games. In the Las Vegas area, many locals casinos offer small slot, video poker and blackjack tournaments on a regular basis, mostly weekly, often as part of their seniors' day programs. "Destination" casinos and some locals casinos sometimes offer bigger tournaments, often to attract out-of-town guests during slow weekends.

The latter used to be a significant source of income for my spouse and me. It seemed that we had at least one tournanent opportunity on many weekends and sometimes had to scramble to participate in two on the same weekend. For us, the entries to these tournaments we always free, based on our play. Prize pools of $50,000 or more were fairly common, and I was able to play in a few blackjack 

tournaments at what was the Las Vegas Hilton (now the Westgate) with prize pools of $100,000. Alas, many of those tournaments have dried up since the recession of 2008.

From the players' point of view, the main problem with playing in a tournament has been the time commitment involved. Typically, you would get an invitation in the mail, to which you would have to respond by phone or e-mail to reserve a place. Then you would have to go to the casio during a specified time, usually a couple of hours during the day before the tournament, to register. At registration you would be assigned your times to play, usually in from two to four sessions during the weekend. Sometimes you would get some choice of when to play (but often sessions were linked so you could pick your morning times but the afternoons times would be set at, say, two hours later in an attempt to keep you in the casino). Sometimes you would have to take the times you were given. Often it was difficult to plan other activities, such as playing in another tournament, around these times.

The M Resort in Las Vegas has come up with what to me is a better tournament format that makes things easier not only for the participants but also for the casino's special events staff. About once a month the casino invites both local and out-of-town players to a slot tournament worth about $35,000 with a $10,000 first prize. The first great thing about these tournaments is that you don't have to call to reserve a spot, which means you also don't have to call if you need to cancel. Your plans can remain flexible right up to the first day of the tournament.

The next great thing is that you don't have to show up in person to register. In fact, you don't have to register at all. But wait, there's more! There are only two sessions, one each on Saturday and Sunday. You can play them any time you want, from 11 a.m. to 8 p.m. Saturday and 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday. Before playing, you print out a ticket at a special tournament kiosk. I sure wish this format had been in effect when we were trying to play in two or more tournaments on some weekends.

Given that the traditional tournament format requires players to spend a lot more time in the casino, you might be wondering why the M would allow players to "hit and run." There are, I think, a couple of anwers. First, players know they won't be invited to these events if they don't maintain a certain level of play. They just don't have to do it on the tournament weekend. Second, the M provides some incentives to get people play during the tournament and on the day before. Starting Friday, players can earn up to two extra entries for Saturday and two for Sunday by earning 1,500 base points on slots or 3,000 on video poker for each extra entry. During the same period they can earn entries in a $5,000 drawing at 5,000 base points per entry. The same base points can count towards the extra tournanent entries and the drawing entries.

The M also has slot or video poker tournaments Tuesdays as part of its seniors' day and Thursdays for everyone. Seniors get one free entry on Tuesdays. On both days, a maximum of five entries can be earned for 250 base points each. Also on both days, you can use these same points toward a free dinner buffet, which requires 1.300 same-day base points on video poker, fewer on reels (you keep the points). 

A long day at work on a huge progressive

I've written before about video poker progressives, games in which a small percentage of the money played through accumulates into an ever-growing jackpot that is paid out to the first player who hits a royal flush. Progressives can become positive for the players when the jackpot reaches a certain amount, which depends on the paytable of the game. Most progressives have such tight paytables that the jackpot has to be so huge for the game to be positive that they rarely reach that point, and even if they do, you are going to lose so much money if you're not the winner that they just aren't worth playing.

Fortunately, there are still a few progressives that I check regularly and play when they reach a certain point. The best of these is a seven-machine dollar progressive at a small casino far from the Strip and downtown Las Vegas. The best game on the multi-game machines is 16/10 NSU deuces wild, with a maximum payback at reset (when the meter goes back to $4,000 after the jackpot is hit) of 99.7 percent. (When the meter reaches about $7,000, it's actually better to play a lower-payback game, 9/6 jacks or better, because royal flushes come more often in that game.) This progressive also has a fairly fast meter, taking one-half of one percent of the money played through for the jackpot. The only negative is that the casino doesn't have a players club, so you aren't earning any points for playing.

I usually check this progressive pretty regularly but had let it slip a recently. On Thursday night, I stopped in and was surprised to see the meter at well over $7,000. My strike point on this progressive is around $6,000, so I sat down and began to play. Only one other player was there, a friendly acquaintace of mine. I played until about 1:30 a.m., losing $1,000. Because he was still playing, I knew I was taking a risk by leaving.

Whether an when to stop playing a good progressive is always a difficult decision. There is simply no way to predict when it might hit. The chance of a player hitting a royal flush on a particular hand is exactly the same, regardless of how long it has been since the last royal flush for that player or on a particular machine or group of machines. That is why there is no basis for belief that a progressive is "overdue" to be hit.

I was willing to take the risk that one player would hit the jackpot late at night to avoid possibly spending all night at the casino and not being able to play until late the next day. That turned out to be the right decision, but it just as easily could have turned out to be wrong.

Before returning to the casino the next morning, I went to get some money out the bank. Unfortunately, it was Veterans Day and the bank was closed, something I hadn't considered. I got my limit of $500 from the ATM. I could have gone to a nearby casino and cashed a check but I wanted to get back to the progressive, and hoped that, with the $500 I had left from the night before, I would have enough to play until the jackpot was hit.

As I walked into the casino, I reminded myself that I was facing three possibilities: 1. The progessive had been hit; 2. It was still there, but all the machines were taken; and 3. It was still there and a seat was available. I knew that of the three, the last was by far the least likely. If it had been hit, at least I could get some breakfast, cash a check and go about my other business. If all the seats were taken, I would ask the players about their plans and make a decision about waiting for a seat to open up.

I was surprised to see both the meter at close to $8,000 and one seat open. I practically jumped into it and began shoving $100 bills into the machine. Of course, it was the slowest machine of the group, but I was glad to get it.

It was about 10:15 in the morning. At first things went well, but then I began to lose. A few hours in, it looked as if my $1,000 might soon run out. I called my wife, but she wasn't in a position to be able to get money to me quickly. The acquaintance who had been playing the night before heard the gist of the conversation and offered to lend me some money. I was very appreciative but wanted to avoid that if at all possible.

When I did run out of money, I took a bathroom break and stopped at the cashier's cage to see if I could cash a check. They didn't take my check cashing card but said I could get a cash advance off a credit or debit card. I had never done this -- in my mind, it was something done only by the worst degenerate gamblers -- and I knew the cost would be high. But I slso knew this play was worth hundreds of dollars an hour. Under the circumstances, taking the advance was a good business decision. At least I could use a debit card and avoid having interest start accruing immediately on a credit card. I also hoped that by using a debit card I could avoid a report that might affect my credit.

The cashier asked me how much I wanted. I thought $500 should be enough but asked for $1,000, just to be safe (I thought). She said the fee would come up on the keypad screen -- $27. I tapped "accept," got the money, and went back to play.

And play and play and play. Afternoon turned to evening and the meter reached $9,000. The casino manager announced that the progressive was setting a record for that casino, and every time a seat opened up, he made an announcement, noting the amount on the meter and saying a couple of times that the jackpot was overdue to be hit.

As the night wore on I ran out of money again and took another $1,000 advance, paying another $27 fee. Except for a few breaks to go to the restroom and get money, I hadn't been out of my increasingly uncomfortable seat all day. A few times I stood up for relief, continuing to play. At about 9:30, standing in front of my machine, I was dealt three cards to a royal flush in diamonds. I hit the draw button and the other two cards popped up. The meter was at $9,920.

The other players murmered congratulations and slinked away. A few minutes later a slot attendant showed up, called the security manager over, and began the half-hour long process of doing the paperwork by hand and getting me paid. While I was waiting, a woman playing one of the old coin dropper machines behind me asked me how much you tip on that kind of a jackpot. I had asked some of the other players the same question earlier. One had said $50, another $10, saying the work involved was the same regardless of the size of the jackpot. Normally I tip one-half of one percent, but I decided to go to $100. The smaller the casino, the bigger a jackpot of a given amount seems to the employees, and I wanted them to be happy to see me the next time I came in.

In addition to the money I won, I was given 100 paper tickets to casino's cash drawing and a chance to spin a prize wheel, which got me a dinner comp for two.

Most gamblers would be ecstatic to win $9,920. I was more relieved than excited. It was a slog, and I had lost $3,600 before it hit. Normally I don't feel it much when I don't win -- losing is a big part of the business -- but in this case it would have hurt more than usual. I have had a pretty tough year, particularly on progressives, and losing this one would have made for an unusually bad streak.

But win or lose, I did the right thing. I only wish I had checked the progressive earlier. If I had, I might have hit it earlier, making less money but saving myself a lot of time and stress.

But maybe not. The thing about progressives is, you just never know when they're going to pop.

A claim worthy of a politician

This being election season, we are hearing all kinds of partial truths, statements taken out of context, and outright lies. Unfortunately, politicians aren't the only ones who engage is various degrees of prevarication. So do gaming establishments.

The Rampart is a casino in Summerlin, a high-end suburban area west of downtown Las Vegas. One of its advertising slogans is that its points "are always worth 5X more." At the Rampart, 1,000 points = $5 cash back.

Presumably, the word "more" refers to the competition. The casino nearest the Rampart is the Suncoast, part of of Boyd Gaming's Coast Casinos group. Not far away is Station Casinos' Red Rock Resort. The Coasts and Stations are, by far, the two leading groups of locals' casinos in the Las Vegas area. The Coasts share a players club, B Connected, with Boyd's three downtown Las Vegas casinos (as well as a number of properties outside of Nevada). The rules for earning and redeeming B Connected Points are the same at all of these properties.

Fortunately for purposes of simplicity, base points at the Boyd and Station properties are earned and redeemed at the same rates, and 1,000 points = $1 cash back at both. So, at first glance, the Rampart's advertising appears to be correct; 1,000 points at the Rampart are worth five times more than 1,000 points at its main competitors.

But that isn't the full story. To know how much points are worth, you must know how much they cost, not just what you get when you redeem them. That cost is usually expressed in terms of how much coin-in it takes to earn a point. Here's where the Rampart's claim begins to fall apart. At both Stations and Boyd casinos, base points are earned at a rate of 1 per $1 of coin in. At the Rampart, it takes $2 of coin-in on video poker to earn one point. Beacause the Rampart's points cost twice as much, it would be more fair at this point to say its points are worth 2-1/2 times the competitions'.

But this is not the full story. At Stations, all players earn 3 times points every day. At Boyd casinos, Sapphire players earn 2 times points every day and Emerald players earn 3 times points every day. So a top-level player at Suncoast and everyone at Red Rock earns six times as many points per dollar played as a video poker player at the Rampart.

To make a fair comparison, we need to look at the cash back per dollar of coin-in, not per point (because Rampart video poker players get fewer points per dollar of coin-in than players at the other casinos). As we have seen, the Rampart gives $2.50 cash back per $1,000 of coin in, based on 500 points earned. At Stations and Boyd (for Emerald players), the rate is $3 cash back for $1,000 coin-in, based on 3,000 points earned.

So, taking into account the cost of earning the points (up to six times as high at the Rampart as at the other casinos), the Rampart's points not only are not worth 5 times as much as much as the points at the other casinos, they are not even worth as much (for all Stations players and Boyd Emerald players).

The bottom line is that cash back as a percentage of coin in at the Rampart is 0.25. At Stations and Boyd (Emerald players), it's 0.3. And that is the standard way of expressing the value of points, which allows a relatively easy comparison between systems at different casinos. (Sometimes the rate at a given casino varies by game or other factors). The value of points for most casinos can be found on VPfree2.

In deciding which casino offers the best deal, the value of points is a major factor. Another is the return from the game you plan to play, also available on VPfree2. Both the Suncoast and Red Rock have video poker games with signficantly higher returns than the best game at the Rampart, the cost of playing at the latter can be more than just the difference in the value of the points. Of course, casino promotions and offers to individual players can alter the comparison on any given day, but discounting these factors, the Rampart doesn't stack up to its competition in Summerlin.

In the spirit of the campaign season, I'd given the Rampart's advertising claim "four Pinnochios" or a "Pants on Fire."

Sam's Town no longer feels like home

From my earliest days in Vegas, Sam's Town has been one of the casinos I have played at regularly. It offered good video poker, progressives in particular, and strong promotions. Recently, a lot has changed.

Like most Vegas casinos, Sam's Town has been graduatlly removing or downgrading its best video poker games for a long time, but very gradually. Until quite recently, it still offered 9/6 jacks or better for $2 and $5, games rarely found at locals casinos. Two bars offered a $1 9/6 jacks or better progressive, which occuasionally turned positive, especially with point multipliers.

In the past couple of years the big attraction for me at Sam's Town has been senior days. Each Wednesday there is a mystery point multiplier and drawing for those 50 and older. The point multipliers, limited to 10,000 base points a day, range up to 30 times for video poker (50 times for slots). (Boyd Gaming's other Coast and downtown Las Vegas Casinos have similar programs.)

Getting 30 times points was rare -- I think it happened only once at Sam's Town -- but for quite a while I was reglarly getting 10 times point and occasionally 15 times points. Ten times brings the return on 9/6 jacks to 100.5 percent without a progressive. That's an expected $50 profit on the $10,000 coin in needed to earn 10,000 base points, the maximum to be multiplied. On $2 jacks, that takes a little over an hour, for a pay rate (not including any winnings in the drawing) of about $40 an hour. Plus a free lunch and dinner buffet.

The first big blow, a few weeks ago, was the removal of all four of the machines that had the $2 and $5 jacks on them. Around this time, the point multipliers took a noticable dip not only at Sam's but at the other Boyd properties. Instead of 10 times or more, they become mostly 5 or 6 times, making jacks or better break-even or a smidge better. Still, the $1 progressive could be an attractive game, depending on the jackpot amount. And there was the drawing.

The final blow, a couple of weeks ago, was the downgrading of the jacks progressive to 8/5, making it unplayable, even with a huge jackpot. There are still a few machines with $1 9/6 jacks and a couple of $1 8/5 bonus poker progressives that occasionally become attractive, but nothing else for the $1 and up video poker player.

At the same time this was happening, Sam's Town closed its Mexican restaurant, Willy & Jose's, and its Billy Bob's steakhouse, one of my favoriites. At the new steakhouse, called the Angry Butcher, the menu is a la carte, where Billy Bob's threw in a salad and potato with your steak.

My read on the video poker situation at Sam's Town is that marketing game away too much in points, and the slot director fought back by taking out the games on which players could easily earn their maximum multiplied points on Wednesdays (and other days Sam's Town offered 7 times points to the public, in most recent months once a week). Of course, the casino is now losing the revenue from the higher-denomination games when there is no point multiplier and the return to all players is negative.

Whatever the reason, the combination of lower point multipliers, lower denomination games and the loss of a good progressive makes Sam's Town a much less attractive place to play. I'm now spening most of Wednesdays at Stations properties, which offer a better $1 game and no limit on the number of points you can earn with a multiplier.

Gambling goes national -- is that a good thing?

My, have public attitudes toward gambling changed during my lifetime (62 years).

I can remember when New Jersey became the second state to legalize casino gambling, and only in Atlantic City, not a major population center.

Then Indian gaming took off, and other states began legalization. Now, just about every state has some form of legalized gambling. The exceptions are Hawaii (a major source of customers for Las Vegas casinos) and Utah, which borders Nevada.

Gambling was promoted as a way to boost local economies, increase tax revenues and provide relatively well-paying jobs.

Now, the latecomers to the game are playing defense. According to my brother who lives in New York, the industry's argument in that state was not that gambling would provide a huge boost, but that establishing casinos in New York would keep money and jobs in that state that were going to neighborhing states and Canada.

In the 21st century the United States has entered a new era concerning gambling. It is no longer a scarce commodity. Is this a good thing?

I would say yes and no. But mostly no.

First the yes part: Gambling has helped the economies of many states, cities and Indian tribes. The economy of Las Vegas, where I live, is still based almost wholly on gaming and related industries. Tunica, Mississippi, was part of one of the poorest, most backward regions of the country before gambling arrived. Atlantic City never realized the revival it had hoped for, but gambling has provided many good jobs for people living in towns along the Jersey Shore.

But in recent years gambling has become an unstable industry and more jurisdictions allowed it. Atlantic City went into decline as Pennslyvania legalized casinos in the Philadelphia area. Reno has suffered from competition from California.

An industry that traditionally thrived because of scarcity is now operating in an environment of competition and, in some cases, oversupply of its product. At the same time, it is having trouble attracting younger customers -- a combination that can lead only to disaster for some operators. As we have seen with Atlantic City, contraction of gambling centers can and will happen.

I believe the more recent expansion of gambling has been due mostly to one factor: anti-tax sentiment. Gambling is seen as a form of voluntary taxation. Politicians get more money to work with, without rasing taxes and losing votes.

As noted concerning New York, this is no longer likely to work in many areas.

I believe in legalized gambling, just about everywhere. But it seeing it as a cash cow or engine of economic development isn't realistic.

So why should casinos be allowed? For one thing, people will gamble anyway. Legalization offers a degree of protection to gamblers and casino operators.

For those who can gamble responsibly, its a legitimate form of enteratainment. For those with certain disabilities, gambling may be one of the few recreational activities they can participate in fully. For those who work odd schedules, most casinos are open 24 hours a day. And casinos are among the few entertainment venues to which people can feel comfortable going by themselves.

On the negative side, gambling is not a productive activity (except for the miniscule number of professional gamblers). Banging away at a slot machine is not good excercise, physically or mentally. Even though very few gamblers are considered addicted, many spend more time and money in casinos than is good for them or their families.

As someone who as observed gamblers for a decade, I believe most of them would be smarter, healthier and happier if they spent some of their gambling time doing just about anything else.

Parking at an MGM property

On Saturday my spouse and I went to the Luxor, one of the MGM Resorts properties on the Strip where parking charges have been instituted. I knew I wasn't going to have to pay -- locals can park free through the end of the year, and I have a pearl-level players card, which also allows free parking. Belt and suspenders.

I had never played or parked at the Luxor before. Finding the garage entrance, which is behind the hotel, required a fair amount of guesswork. The signage is terrible. Strike one.

Three empoyees were stationed at the entrace/exit to the garage. This in itself indicates that the process is not self-explanatory. I showed one of the employees my players card. He stuck it in a slot in a machine and gave it back to me. No ticket, which concerned me a little. I asked what I would have to do to get out. Just stick the card in the machine, he said. Later I would find out that there is more than one machine.

After leaving the casino, approaching the garage, I saw a machine and a sign saying, "Pay for parking here." I didn't know whether this was the machine a should stick my players card in (there was a slot, apparently for credit and debit cards). I did insert my card, and the little screen said something like "card fully debited." I don't know what that meant. Maybe it thought it had a debit card and couldn't find any money in the account. Maybe it took all my points.

At the exit, I asked the empoyee if I had to use the "pay for parking here" machine. He said no, I would just have to insert my players card in the machine at the exit. He did it for me and we were allowed to leave.

I don't think it's possible to tell based on my experience whether the parking charges have reduced the number of people parking at the Luxor. The first floor of the garage had lots of cars, but was not full. I have no basis for comparing this to when parking was free.

One more thing: Throughout the garage, there are now signs hanging from the ceiling saying, "Have you paid for parking?" Besides seeming vaguely threatening, they are likely to be confusing, especially to drivers who have just entered the garage and might be wondering if they were supposed to pay at the gate.

For people are parking in that garge for the first time, the whole process is likely to be confusing. With "pay to park," MGM has managed to institute a policy that is both substantively and procedurally annoying.

Access to cash

Cash is the gambler's raw material. As the saying goes, it takes money to make money. Specifically, for my purposes, it takes a daily bankroll of roughly $3,000 to $5,000.

When I'm at home in the Vegas area, I usually keep this much money or a little more in the house and take it with me when I go out. Yes, I habitually walk around with thousands of dollars in my wallet. I take reasonable precautions and stay mostly on casino property when carrying cash, and in more than 10 years as a gambler I have never had a problem.

Sometimes the money I have with me is not enough, due to a large loss. If I need to replenish a large part of my daily bankroll to continue playing, the ATM is of no use. This limit on daily withdrawals at my bank is too low. Paying casino ATM fees -- or any ATM fee, except in the most dire emergency -- is out of the question. And don't even think about an exhorbitantly expensive credit card advance. (For a more detailed and highly entertaining discussion of options for obtaining access to cash in a casino, see Max Rubin's book, Comp City.)

If the bank is open, great. But if it isn't, or I'm too far away, that could be a problem.

One potential solution is casino credit. The good thing about casino credit is that it's free if you qualify. You have 30 days to pay your markers. The problem with casino credit is that it must be established in advance, separately, every place you want to use it. Plus, I just don't like the idea of borrowing money to gamble, even without interest. But if you can handle it, play at a limited number of places and qualify for an adequate line, credit can be a good solution.

Another option is depositing front money at a casino where you plan to play. This is what it sounds like, giving the casino your money in advance and drawing it down when you arrrive. Like casino credit, this requires advance planning and isn't helpful for taking advantage of spur-of-the-moment opportunities.

I recently became aware of what in many cases is a better option, though not without its limitations. A company called Global Payments offers a check cashing card that is accepted at many casinos. I recently signed up, a very simple process. You just provide a blank check and your ID at the cage of a participating casino. You also must give your Social Security number. I assume they checked my credit (good) and checking account balance (about $10,000 at the time). I was given an initial limit of $4,000 a week. This is not as much as I could conceibably need, but it's a lot better than the $300 limit set by the last casino where I tried to cash a check, years ago.

There's no charge for this service, and you don't even need to bring a check to the casino, just the card the company gives you. Of course, if your check bounces, you'll be liable for fees and possibly costs of collection. I plan to use it a few times rather than going to the bank to withdraw money and then ask for an increase in my limit. I will write about what happens, and whether there any unanticipated downsides to using this service. But for now, it looks like a valuable piece of the puzzle posed by unexpected needs for cash. 

Consolidation in the Vegas locals casino market

Some major changes in the ownership of Vegas-area locals casinos have been announced in the past few months. The two major owners of locals casinos, Stations (whose official corporate name is now
Red Rock Casinos) and Boyd Gaming, are about to expand their empires. Stations has bought the Palms, just west of the center of the Las Vegas Strip. Boyd, which owns the Coast chain of locals casinos, has bought Aliante, the northeast part of the valley; the Cannery, in the northwest, and the Eastside Cannery, on Boulder Highway.

The first effect of these transactions is likely to be a strengthening of Boyd's position in relation to Stations, its main competitor. Boyd now operates four casinos in the locals market -- Sam's Town, the Gold Coast, the Orleans and the Suncoast. The recent acquisitions will give Boyd a total of seven, compared with Stations' 10, including the Palms and the two Fiesta-branded properties. It will also expand Boyd's reach to the northern part of the valley, from which it has been absent.

Aliante has been struggling since it was built because the recession nearly halted development in its vicinity. But a huge electric car plant is planned for the area, which should eventually spur development and increase that casino's customer base.

The original Cannery is well-located, without a lot of competition in the area. I'm sure it's the main reason Boyd bought Cannery Resorts. The Eastside Cannery is in a less desirable area and has a lot more competitors nearby -- including Boyd's flagship locals property, Sam's Town, which is right across the street.

It will be interesting to see how Boyd positions and markets these two properties. There's a precedent, provided by Texas Station and Fiesta Rancho, across the street from each other and both owned by Stations. The Fiesta brand is aimed at a little bit lower demographic, with, for example, less-expensive restaurants and lower table game limits. Sam's Town and the Eastside Cannery appear to have a similar customer base but the properties are somewhat complementary in their facilities. Sam's Town has movie theaters, a bowling center, a poker room and a food court; the Eastside Cannery does not. But there's also some overlap -- both have large Bingo rooms.

The restautant situation at the two casinos appears to offer opportunities for synergy. Sam's Town is replacing its steakhouse, Billy Bob's, with a barbeque restaurant, and opening a new restaurnt called the Angry Butcher in the space formerly occupied by Willy & Jose's. The Eastside Cannery had a Mexican restaurant when it opened; the closing of Willy & Jose's would seem to all but require the reopening of a Mexican eatery in the Eastside Cannery, given the population of the neighborhood. The Eastside Cannery also has a steakhouse, which might fill some of the void left by the closing of Billy Bob's.

The big question is whether Boyd will fold any or all of its new properties into its Coast chain. I haven't heard or read anything about this. It might make sense for Boyd to reorganize its locals casinos under two brands, as Stations has done. This might help differentiate two of its properties that are very close together, the Orleans and the Gold Coast, as well as Sam's Town and the Eastside Cannery. Boyd also has three downtown properties, Main Street Station, the California and the Fremont. These serve mostly tourists, including the Hawaiian market, but one or more of them might be marketed at least in a limited way with another division of reorganized Boyd properties in Vegas.

Stations' acquisition of the Palms raises the question of how that casino will fit in to the existing Stations lineup. There seems to be general agreement that Stations will market the Palms as part of its luxury properties, Red Rock and Green Valley Ranch, and that the Palms will become part of the Stations brand for players club and marketing purposes.

But the Palms, when it was owned by George Maloof, occupied a unique niche in the locals market. Its nightclubs, high-end restaurants and loose video poker drew customers from a larger area than the typical Stations property could. Presumably, Stations acquired the Palms marketing database.

The question in my mind is how, if at all, Stations will market the Palms to players who live closer to and play at other Station casinos. My guess is that Stations will not to to get these players to continue playing at the Palms as well as their nearby Station property; to do so would require duplicate offers. There is precedent, however; Stations and Fiesta send separate offers to customers of both. But the problem is that the Palms no longer has games that are likely to draw customers from, say, Summerlin or Henderson. My guess is that Stations will not try to compete with itself for play, but will tout the Palms as a new place to use points for dining, entertainment and other options not available at the company's other properties. If successful, this would increase the value of playing at Station casinos in general, though not specifically at the Palms.

Another question is whether and how quickly Stations will be able to change certain things at the Palms. For example, the Palms has a Cantor Gaming sportsbook; I'm sure Stations wants to install its own book, there must be a contract that gives CG the right to operate a book at the Palms for some specified period. Similarly, Stations might want to replace the world's largest Hooters with something more suitable for a high-end property, but how long will it have to wait?

Something I'll be interested in watching is the effect of Station's takoever of the Palms on the Gold Coast, which has benefitted from mismanagement at the Palms in recent years. I expect the Palms to be a much more formidable rival to the Gold Coast under the control of Stations, which already competes for the same Asian players with its Palace Station casino. The Gold Coast (and Palms and Palace Station) also will soon face compeitition from a new casino on Sahara Avenue, the Lucky Dragon.

As a player, I have to believe that all this consolidation will shrink opportunities for customers overall, although competition in some ways will be increased. Since almost all of the changes are yet to come, I can still hope I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Poetic license

The other day I saw this on a license plate: AKQJ10. That's a royal flush. Another one I see from time to time: 21 I WIN. Pretty clever.

Our prediction addiction

Over the years I have occasionally thought about what's behind the lure of gambling.

There can be no doubt that gambling is basic human urge, as evidenced by the numbers of people in casinos, betting online and participating in office football pools and kitchen table poker games.

My one college psychology course taught that behavior that is reinforced is repeated. Wins reinforce gambling behavior. Video poker and old-fashioned slot machines show "wins" that are just a return of the player's bet; newer penny slots go a step further, showing as a win any money returned on a spin, even if it's less than the amount wagered.

It's been reported that, to addicted gamblers, "near misses" on slot machines -- 7, 7 on the payline, then a 7 just above or below it -- are as reinforcing as actual wins.

I recently heard an interviewer with a slot game designer, who said players of today's machines are looking for "entertainment and escape." Sounds reasonable to me, based on the mesmermized masses I see every day, drinks and cigarettes at hand as they gaze blankly into their screens.

Lately it's occurred to me that our need to gamble might be tied in with another basic need. Following the elections, I've been struck by how much time the media spend on trying to predict the outcomes of elections. Analysts opine on the air constantly; polls are taken and released almost daily. All this effort to come up with a predictions that mean nothing until they are dashed or confirmed by the actual election!

The media's focus is the same in sports and entertainment coverage. Who will win the Super Bowl? Which movie will get the Oscar for best picture? The game will be played, the awards handed out. But we can't wait.

Some of this, I think, is ego. If I can predict correctly, especially is my position is unpopular, I must be pretty smart. And if you predict incorrectly, you aren't as smart as I am. But more than just ego seems to be involved. We just want to know, before we really can know.

Much of gambling is involves predicting. Which horse will win the race? Will the roulette ball land on a red space or a black one? Will the shooter make his point or seven out? Even that most passive of gamblers, the slot player, must decide when to play and select a machine presumably with a prediction (or at least a hope) of a winning session in mind.

Gambling, like many of our other obsessions, is about the future and our compulsion to know it before it arrives.

Pay to park? In Vegas?

In what is likely to become a public relations disaster for the company and possibly for the Las Vegas Strip as a whole, MGM Resorts International announced yesterday that it will start charging for parking this spring at its major resorts.

Resorts near MGM properties, including the Tropicana, Paris and Bally's and Caesars Palace, will probably have to start charging as a defensive move. If that happens, it will likely create a tipping point, and free parking on the Strip will be gone.

In a way it is suprising that this idea hasn't been attempted before as casino executives have tried, with a great deal of success, to wring profits out of operations that traditionally supported their casinos, such as restaurants, hotels and nightclubs.

And it's not unreasonable that people who come to, say, the Bellagio just to eye the fountain show and the conservatory should pay something, especially if their vehicles are occupying spaces that could be used by gamblers or diners or nightclub patrons. Further, it appears that MGM will allow some customers to park for free.

Still, this does not seem to be a good idea. Americans have an entitlement mentality about free parking, especially at places where they're expected to spend their money, such as shopping malls -- and casinos. But in Vegas, it's more than that. Many people drive to the city -- half of all visitors come from California -- and often are here for only a few days. They have their cars here anyway, and free parking helps them make the most of their time and money.

MGM also announced that it's going to build a new parking garage at the Excalibur, to serve the new sports arena, the adjacent park and commercial area, and the theater at the Monte Carlo. These are the kinds of attractions at which customers in other cities are used to paying for parking. It might have made sense and been widely accepted if MGM had limited parking fees to just this facility.

But MGM says it will charge for parking at all its Strip properties, except for self-parking at Circus Circus, where it will charge for valet parking. (Assuming customers will not want to tip as much, or at all, when they're paying a parking fee, this looks like an attempt by the company to steal from its valet parking employees.) It justifies these fees by promising improvements in parking facilities, incluing technology that will allow customers to check on availablity of spaces before they arrive and that will guide them to open spots.

Given the choice of this technology, and even enhanced lighting and signage (also promised), or free parking, I think I'd take ... let me think ... the free parking! In an online poll in the Review-Journal today 70 percent of respondents said they'd no longer go to the Strip if they had to pay for parking. (This is not a scientific poll.) But people don't like "resort fees" either, and the casino industry continues to get away with those.

If this parking policy sticks, I think the beneficiaries will be the big outlying casinos, from Sam's Town to the Golden Nugget to Red Rock Resort, I just got back from a trip on Southwest Airlines, and its magazine had an add for Station Casinos with a headline like "Strip blackjack pays 6 to 5. Our blackjack pays 3 to 2." Free parking will be another advantage they can advertise.

As someone who is part of the Vegas economy, it bothers me that one of the leading companies in the leading industry doesn't seem more concerned about ticking off customers, who enjoy more options for their gaming and entertainment dollars in other regions than ever before. Gaming is having trouble attracting younger patrons, and this policy is likely to keep some new customers out of the casinos because free parking apparently will have to be earned over tine through the players club.

My prediction is that MGM's newly announced policy won't stick, at least not without major modifications.

Consolidation in downtown Reno

The three major casinos in downtown Reno, other than Harrah's, are now under unified ownership. Eldorado Resorts, owner of the Eldorado and half owner of the Silver Legacy, has bought Circus Circus and half of the Silver Legacy from MGM Resorts International. Eldorado already owned half of the Silver Legacy. The deal closed in November.

The projected cost of the Silver Legacy, which opened in 1995, was $230 million. Eldorado purchased half of this 1,700 rooms plus the entire 1,572-room Circus Circus for a total of $72.5 million.

This clearly shows the strain the Reno gaming market has been under as Indian casinos in California have intercepted its customers from northern California. Another victim of this competition is the Siena Reno, a downtown hotel which was sold in May and closed its casino in June.

Of course, Reno is not alone gaming markets in suffering from increased competition. Atlantic City and the big Indian casinos in Connecticut are among others in the same boat. Foxwoods, in Connecticut, is hoping to make itself more attractive by adding an outlet mall. Atlantic City has been adjusting in large part by closing casinos.

I have no inside information, but my guess is that Eldorado resorts will close the Circus Circus casino, which should shore up business for its other two properties. Video poker pay tables at Circus Circus have been drastically downgraded, which suggests a short-term orientation toward the casino business.

What could Eldorado do with Circus Circus, which originally was built as a department store? My first thought was that the casino could be converted to a different type of attraction, such as an indoor water park. But it's possible that the property, which is near Interstate 80, a hospital and the University of Nevada - Reno, might bring in more money if used for a purposed unrelated to tourism.

Experts say that the key to revitalizing city centers is to get people to live downtown. I could see the Circus Circus site as a massive mixed-use project that could accomplish this goal for Reno. The housing element could be attractice to downtown casino workers, hospital nurses and other workers, and students and university staff.

It will be interesting to see how big Eldorado Resorts and "the biggest little city" will think in deciding on the future of Circus Circus.

A challenge to Sheldon Adelson

The Las Vegas Review-Journal, Nevada's largest newspaper, is now owned by Sheldon Adelson, who controls Las Vegas Sands Corp., owner of the Venetian and Palazzo on the Las Vegas Strip as well as major casinos elsewhere in the United States and in Asia.

Adelson is a major donor and therefore influence in Republican politics. In the last presidential election cycle, he backed Newt Gingrich for the GOP nomination. He is a strong supporter of Israel and in particular its current conservative government. He owns a newspaper in that country.

Locally, he has been known for his battles with the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Bureau, which he regards as a competitor for his convention business that unfairly enjoys the advantage of access to tax revenue. Adelson has opposed organization of workers in his Las Vegas hotels by the Culinary Union, which represents employees at most other Strip properties.

He is also known for his litigiousness, having sued among other people R-J columnist John L. Smith, driving him into bankrupcy.

Adelson says, laughably, that he bought the R-J for $140 million as a business investment. His pledge that he will not interfere with thepaper's editorial operations must be viewed with skeptcisim. The R-J itself just reported on a mysterious review of the perfomance of three Clark County (Las Vegas) judges, one of whom is hearing a major case involiving Adelson, that was ordered by the former owner of the paper but may have been done at the behest of the soon-to-be owner.

It has been noted that the R-J is already a conservative, libertarian-leaning newspaper in line with Adelson's political orientation. That is true of the paper's opinion pages. But the potential problems concern the paper's newsgathering function. The independence of the paper's reporters and editors is threatened not only by Adelson's political involvements, but also by his business interests.

Las Vegas Sands is a major player in a major industry that affects the Las Vegas economy but also the economies of cities and regions throughout the country. The R-J has been a major source of news coverage of that industry. Imagine the challenges the Detroit Free Press would face if the Ford family bought that newspaper. That's about the same situation with a different industry in Las Vegas.

The big problem in judging a newspaper's performance is what then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called "unknown unknowns." Many of the biggest shortcomings in news coverage involve not what is covered, but in what doesn't appear in the paper at all. Unbalanced or inaccurate coverage is relatively easy to spot; more difficult is imaging what the paper should be covering that it isn't. Yes, there are competing media in the Las Vegas market, but none with the resources and reach of the Review-Journal.

If Adelson is to gain the confidence of the community in spite of the obvious potential for conflicts of interest, he must not only assure the indepence of the R-J's news operation, he must appoint an indendent ombudsman and give that person absolute independence to investigate, report and comment not only on readers' issues and complaints, but also on the paper's internal operations and the news judgment of its editors.

A second thing he could do is to create a position that the general interest Las Vegas media have always needed and never really had -- that of a consunmer-oriented gaming columnist/critic, someone with the expertise to give competent advice, answer reader questions, analyze industry trends affecting gamblers and investigate possible abuses in the industry.

If Adelson can't tolerate an indendent staff, his paper will lack credibility and therefore any value to the community. Eventually the community will reject it and his "investment" will fail.

I hope Adelson rises to the occasion, but I have to say I'll be surprised if he does. The best outcome for the community probably will be if Adelson decides the hassles of owning the paper aren't worth the trouble, and sells it to someone or some company legitimately in the news business.

Restaurants and the rodeo

I've been meaning for some time to write about  a real restaurant find, the Second Street Grille in the Fremont downtown. This small art deco style room serves some very imaginative variations of steakhouse fare, including Mongolian rack of lamb, Thai Cioppino (all right, not usually served in a steakhouse) and Paniola rib-eye steak, with a southwestern-influenced sauce. The service is excellent and there's rarely a wait to get in. The staff says very few locals ever eat there, which is a shame.

The Rio was the only casino I know of that had two completely separate buffets -- the Carnival World Buffet and the Village Seafood Buffet. Until a couple of weeks ago, they were at opposite ends of the very large casino. Now the seafood buffet has been moved to the Carnival World location. The new setup works like this: There are separate entrances for each buffet. The new seafood buffet contains only seafood items. If you pay for the seafood buffet, you also get access to entire Carnival World buffet. You can also, for less, buy access to only the Carnival World, which does include some seafood, including crab legs at dinner. This makes sense to me because it avoids the duplication of offering non-seafood items at both buffets and gives seafood customers a much wider choice of other items. The spouse and I sprung for the seafood buffet recently and were a bit disappointed. Many of the seafood items had been left out too long. Now is a good time to try the Carnival World Buffet; you can get in free by earning 50 tier credits ($500 coin-in) and swiping your player card at a special promotional kiosk outside the buffet. The ticket is good for a couple of days.

The National Finals Rodeo is in town, and South Point has been full people who may be cowboys or may be just Walgreens managers from Laramie and accountants from Boise dressed up like cowboys. One sign the rodeo is in town is the sign in front of Don Vito's, the casino's Italian restaurant, which states that it will be serving the Silverado Steakhouse menu while the cowboys are in town, due to the high demand for steak during the rodeo.