This one I literally refuse to believe. Blogger David McKee reports on the Las Vegas Advisor web site that MGM Resorts, owner of several major Las Vegas casinos, plans to convert all its remaining 3:2 blackjack games on the Strip to 6:5.
For those not familiar with blackjack, one of the basics of the game is that a player dealt a blackjack -- an ace and ten-value card -- is paid one and a half times his bet, or 3:2.
In the past decade, many casinos have reduced the payout for blackjack to 6:5, starting with single-deck games. Gradually the 6;5 curse has spread to other games, including some as bad as eight-deck shoes with no double after split.
I don't spend much time on the Strip, but unless things have changed drastically in the past year, there are still many good 3:2 games there, especially at MGM properties. Downtown and at the locals casinos, most games still pay the traditional 3:2.
It is sad but true that many ploppies will play a game that pays them $12 for a blackjack on a $10 bet instead of $15, robbing them of about $12 an hour based on the average number of blackjacks received by a player in a moderately fast game. To an extent, 6:5 games have gained acceptance by a segment of the gaming public.
But that is not to say that those who now play 3:2 games, especially for higher stakes, will acquiesce in a change to 6:5. A $100 bettor is being shortchanged $120 an hour by a 6:5 game, and it is hard to believe that that amount of damage won't soon be felt.
If MGM goes through with its horrible idea, it will present a golden opportunity for its competition to tout the availability of its full-pay blackjack games. Explaining the difference between a 3:2 game and a 6:5 game isn't that complicated and should be easily accomplished in newspaper, magazine, billboard and online advertising.
I predict that if MGM goes through with this plan, its blackjack play will drop off precipitously and it will be forced to relent. You read it here first.
The other item of interest is from Vegas Inc., also by way of Las Vegas Advisor. It's about a report commissioned by the Association of Gaming Equipment Manufacturers which suggests that the reduction in slot machine payouts in recent years has led to a decline in slot revenues. The Vegas Inc. story, including a link to the study, can be found at http://vegasinc.com/business/gaming/2015/aug/20/slot-revenue-drops-machines-get-tighter-industry/
The idea that people will play less if games return less is a subject of hot debate in the gaming industry. Some believe that variance -- the ups and downs of a game's return -- far outweigh long-term average return in most players' experience. Others argue that the effect of a reduction in return cannot be masked for very long as players experience less "time on device" for their money.
My opinion is that the first point of view made more sense when gaming was confined mostly to a few resort destination. Now that gaming is widely available, many more people are able to play more often and get a more accurate idea of how quickly their money is likely to disappear in a typical session.
Absent from both the study and the Vegas Inc. article was any mention of the growth of penny slots in recent years. These machines have become very popular despite the fact that they have the lowest payouts. So, at least to some extent, slot players have themselves to blame for the lower returns they are getting.
Both of these news items bring to mind two recurring thoughts of mine concerning the casino business. First, unlike other transactions in a market economy, all aspects of gaming are a zero-sum game. What the players get comes out of the pockets of the casinos and vice-versa. Second, except for the pathetic addicted degenerate gamblers that the industry claims it would never want as customers, no one has to gamble. Casinos are in competition not only with each other but with all other forms of entertainment. Try to take so much from the customer that the enjoyment from gambling is no longer worth the cost, and people will do other things for fun.
Perhaps the biggest threat to the future of gaming as an industry is the constant craving of Wall Street for earnings growth. In this era of gaming saturation, expansion can no longer satisfy this appetite. As the big casino companies try to increase earnings by further squeezing their customers, they will reach a point where they hurt their own bottom line. We may be near that point now.
Saturday, August 22, 2015
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
An unwelcome hand pay
To most slot and video poker players, a hand pay is usually a good thing. A hand pay, as its name implies, is a jackpot that must be paid by an employee, usually because it is $1,200 or more and must be reported to the IRS. When a player hits such a jackpot, the machine locks up and usually starts playing music. The screen will alternately flash the amount of the jackpot and the words "call attendant," although in virtually all cases the machine has electronically notified the slot attendant dispatcher of the fortuitous event. At a casino with a competently run slot floor, an employee will arrive within a couple of minutes, punch some data into the machine, ask the player for ID and a Social Security number, then go to work station to prepare the tax forms and get the money. Five minutes or so later, the player is paid, the machine reset, and life goes on as before.
So when is this a bad thing? Well, if you're betting big stakes, especially on a multi-line game (triple play, five play, ten play, fifty play or hundred play), the jackpots can constantly interrupt your play. Sometimes a casino will minimize the stoppages by stationing an employee next to a big player to record all the jackpots and add them up later, issuing one collective tax form. This is called "key to credit."
A jackpot can also be a nuisance if if you're playing a high limit, single line game, such as $5 jacks or better. A straight flush in this game (with max coin bet) pays $1,250, which feels more like upward blip in fortune than a windfall. Stopping play, waiting to be paid and dealing with employees who expect to be tipped is annoying when you don't feel as if if you've really won anything. Some casinos, such as the Rio in Las Vegas, avoid this unhappy situation by reducing the payout for the straight flush to $1.199, which benefits the player by avoiding a hand-pay situation, saves time and work for casino employees, and saves the casino $51 each occurrence. Because the straight flush is quite rare, the reduction in the payback of the game is a minuscule 0.02 percent, in my opinion an acceptable price to pay as a player.
There's one other situation in which a hand pay is a nuisance, and this is especially annoying because it is unnecessary and exploitative. Machines can be set to require a hand pay for amounts less than $1,200, and some casinos do this.
Tonight I was playing at Emerald Island, a small casino in downtown Henderson, a suburb of Las Vegas. This is an extreme low roller environment, billed as "Nevada's only all penny casino." I'm not sure exactly what the slogan means, but the game I play there is 300-coin "not so ugly" nickel deuces on a 10-play machine. So I was betting $15 a hand, three times as much as if I had been playing a $1 single-line game. Anyone who has played at this level knows that you can lose hundreds of dollars in 15 or 20 minutes, and this has often been my experience at Emerald Island.
But soon after sitting down tonight, I got lucky. I was dealt three deuces, and hit the fourth on two lines, for a total of $600. Much to my surprise, the machine locked up and started playing jackpot music.
A waited a few minutes then a few minutes more, getting annoyed that no one showed up. Eventually I tracked someone down and was paid. The employee told me that every jackpot of $400 or more at Emerald Island is a hand pay.
Why would a casino create this extra work for its employees and annoyance for its customers? The only reason I can think of is that management thinks it creates a tipping opportunity. Many customers, including me, do tip on hand pays, particularly of $1,200 or more. I have sometimes tipped on smaller jackpots ($1,000 seems to be a popular threshold) but I was not about to tip for $643 (including the wins on lines other than the two sets of deuces), especially when the service was lousy. On the other hand, to a penny or nickel player, a $400 win might seem like enough of a windfall to warrant a tip, especially in a case of good service and/or an employee known and liked by the customer.
Although I am generally opposed to making unnecessary work for the purpose of generating tips, in Emerald Island's case I understand the policy -- in most cases. But it seems to me that on machines where customers are playing at higher stakes, the jackpot trigger amount should be set higher.
So when is this a bad thing? Well, if you're betting big stakes, especially on a multi-line game (triple play, five play, ten play, fifty play or hundred play), the jackpots can constantly interrupt your play. Sometimes a casino will minimize the stoppages by stationing an employee next to a big player to record all the jackpots and add them up later, issuing one collective tax form. This is called "key to credit."
A jackpot can also be a nuisance if if you're playing a high limit, single line game, such as $5 jacks or better. A straight flush in this game (with max coin bet) pays $1,250, which feels more like upward blip in fortune than a windfall. Stopping play, waiting to be paid and dealing with employees who expect to be tipped is annoying when you don't feel as if if you've really won anything. Some casinos, such as the Rio in Las Vegas, avoid this unhappy situation by reducing the payout for the straight flush to $1.199, which benefits the player by avoiding a hand-pay situation, saves time and work for casino employees, and saves the casino $51 each occurrence. Because the straight flush is quite rare, the reduction in the payback of the game is a minuscule 0.02 percent, in my opinion an acceptable price to pay as a player.
There's one other situation in which a hand pay is a nuisance, and this is especially annoying because it is unnecessary and exploitative. Machines can be set to require a hand pay for amounts less than $1,200, and some casinos do this.
Tonight I was playing at Emerald Island, a small casino in downtown Henderson, a suburb of Las Vegas. This is an extreme low roller environment, billed as "Nevada's only all penny casino." I'm not sure exactly what the slogan means, but the game I play there is 300-coin "not so ugly" nickel deuces on a 10-play machine. So I was betting $15 a hand, three times as much as if I had been playing a $1 single-line game. Anyone who has played at this level knows that you can lose hundreds of dollars in 15 or 20 minutes, and this has often been my experience at Emerald Island.
But soon after sitting down tonight, I got lucky. I was dealt three deuces, and hit the fourth on two lines, for a total of $600. Much to my surprise, the machine locked up and started playing jackpot music.
A waited a few minutes then a few minutes more, getting annoyed that no one showed up. Eventually I tracked someone down and was paid. The employee told me that every jackpot of $400 or more at Emerald Island is a hand pay.
Why would a casino create this extra work for its employees and annoyance for its customers? The only reason I can think of is that management thinks it creates a tipping opportunity. Many customers, including me, do tip on hand pays, particularly of $1,200 or more. I have sometimes tipped on smaller jackpots ($1,000 seems to be a popular threshold) but I was not about to tip for $643 (including the wins on lines other than the two sets of deuces), especially when the service was lousy. On the other hand, to a penny or nickel player, a $400 win might seem like enough of a windfall to warrant a tip, especially in a case of good service and/or an employee known and liked by the customer.
Although I am generally opposed to making unnecessary work for the purpose of generating tips, in Emerald Island's case I understand the policy -- in most cases. But it seems to me that on machines where customers are playing at higher stakes, the jackpot trigger amount should be set higher.
Friday, June 26, 2015
A hint of desperation
It's been very hot in Las Vegas lately -- today's high, 112 degrees -- and maybe that's resulted in fewer people going out to gamble. Whatever the reason, several casinos have taken unusual steps recently to lure players in.
It's been a long time since the Palms has offered point multipliers. Instead, it allows players to earn gift cards with weekday play at a rate of 0.2 percent on video poker. That's almost equal to the point value of 0.25 percent. But the other day I got an e-mail from the Palms offering double points yesterday, a day on which play also counted toward gift cards, bringing the total value offered to 0.7 percent. The best game on which the multiplier could be earned was 16/10 "not-so-ugly" deuces, with a maximum payback of 99.73, making for a 100.4+ percent play. (On top of that, I had an American Casino Guide coupon for $50 in free play after earning 15,000 points in one day, adding 0.33 percent.) I was worried so many people would come to the Palms for the point multiplier that all the "good" machines would be taken, but that proved not to be a problem.
When I checked my e-mail last night, there was an offer for $15 in free play today or tomorrow from Station Casinos. Stations has rarely if ever made such an offer by e-mail. This offer and the Palms point multiplier seem to me to be attempts to boost coin-in totals before the end of the month, indicating that play to this point has not been up to expectations.
Another indication of desperation: A few weeks ago, the SLS, the north Strip casino that had been the Sahara, offered 10 times points on video poker. My spouse and I both went in and lost a lot of money. The other day, a host called and offered her a 5 percent rebate in free play of her loss that day. Brilliant woman that she is, she asked the host to check on my play that day to see I could get a rebate as well. Sure enough, the host called back and said I could get $150 in addition to the $350 offered my spouse.
While I was at the SLS the day of our big losses, I chatted with a host I recognized from the now-closed Riviera. She admitted the property was struggling, and was trying to attract locals. Ever helpful, I offered some free advice.
First, I will say that it's hard to attract locals to the Strip on a regular basis because of traffic and parking concerns. For those lacking comps, the restaurants and other amenities on the Strip are much more expensive than in the locals casinos or downtown. The machines, both reel slots and video poker, are generally tighter, and table game minimums are higher. To a degree this is necessary because of the higher costs of operating on the Strip.
In some respects, SLS, away from the center of the Strip, is relatively well positioned to draw locals. It's near I-15's Sahara Avenue exit and has lots of convenient garage parking, which can be entered from either the Las Vegas Boulevard or Paradise Avenue sides of the building. But the big challenge facing the SLS and other Strip and downtown properties trying to draw locals is this: What can I offer to make it worthwhile for people to drive past the Red Rock Resort, Green Valley Ranch or other major locals casinos to come to my property?
I pointed out to the host from the Riviera that the SLS's video poker pay tables are not competitive with those at the locals casinos and that when the SLS was the Sahara, it had a section called Locals Lane that featured better video poker as well as reel slots. (There was no requirement that you had to be a local to play in Locals Lane; it was open to everyone.) Bringing back Locals Lane or something like it would indicate that the SLS is willing to do something special to win their business.
Something the SLS has been doing and should build on is holding tournaments. The locals casinos don't offer many tournaments of any significant value. When what is now the Westgate was the Las Vegas Hilton, it offered monthly tournaments geared most to locals as well as larger tournaments that were open to qualifying locals. These tournaments helped build a loyal group of local customers, many of whom formed friendships not only with one another but also with casino employees. (The casino business, though largely taken over by numbers crunchers, also still is -- or should be -- a relationship business.)
Another thing the SLS might try to do is market itself as the place for locals' friends and family members to stay on the Strip. Offering locals free room nights that can be used by visitors might bring in new out-of-town customers who could be marketed to separately. The SLS is an attractive property, catering to the sensibilities of younger people. To this crowd, the resort's location away from the center of the Strip may be a disadvantage, but one that could be at least partially overcome by cooperative marketing with the Las Vegas Monorail, which stops at the property. Possibility: a free Monorail pass with every stay of more than a specified number of nights.
One thing the SLS has been doing that I don't think is likely to be effective is blitzing locals with gift offers. Although gifts have been very effective at locals casinos in getting people through the doors, I doubt they will be as good at a casino that most customers have to travel a considerable distance and/or go out of their way to reach. And then there's still the problem of getting people to play once you've gotten them in the door. If I were in management at SLS, I would consider redirecting the gift budget to dining offers. This would be in line with the overall marketing of the resort as a "foodie" destination. One thing I might to for locals is offer a discount for walking in that could be upgraded to a free meal with a certain amount of play.
Finally, Boyd Gaming has expanded its Wednesday "Young at Heart" program from the Coast locals casinos to its downtown properties, the Fremont, California and Main Street Station. This month there have been separate "Young at Heart" point multipliers -- up to 30 times points on video poker with a maximum of 100,000 multiplied points -- during the day and from 7 p.m. to midnight, as well as drawing, buffet offers and dining credits.
I think its smart for Boyd to market its downtown casinos to locals. Boyd's Coast chain has about half as many properties at Stations, its major competitor in the locals market. Two Coast properties, the Orleans and Gold Coast, are very close to each other. There is no Coast property in the northern part of the Las Vegas Valley, where Stations has Santa Fe Station, Texas Station and Fiesta Rancho.
But it's not going to be easy for Boyd to get middle-aged, middle-class residents of the outlying areas to come downtown. Panhandlers, drunken tourists, traffic hassles, parking restrictions and outdated properties are among the turn-offs. Attractive gaming offers are probably necessary but not sufficient to draw more locals. What's needed is an education effort that frankly addresses the reasons locals have for not wanting to go downtown and letting them know what Boyd has done to minimize the problems and why its worth making the trip despite the problems that can't be eliminated.
For example: The Fremont has no self-parking, only valet. Parking at other casinos along Fremont Street is no longer a good option for visitors to the Fremont who don't also want to play or eat at another casino. But, as my spouse found out only by asking, anyone with a Boyd sapphire or emerald players card can park all day for free at the California's garage, without the hassle of dealing with validation. Boyd needs to let locals know they can park downtown, in a covered garage, virtually hassle-free.
Although driving into and out of downtown is pretty easy, it's easy for those not familiar with the tangle of highways leading there to be intimidated. Any mailing aimed to get people downtown should provide maps and directions to the properties being marketed.
Of the three downtown Boyd casinos, one is right on the Fremont Street Experience and two are a short walk from it. I think this situation calls for some sophisticated marketing, especially to locals. I would try to get locals to think of one of the casinos -- Main Street Station is my choice -- as their "headquarters," with easy access to the others for those who want it as a bonus.
Main Street is the most attractive of the three properties and the farthest from the commotion of the FSE. It has a nice buffet and a brew pub, amenities that many locals should find attractive. It is connected by enclosed bridge to the Cal, where patrons can park all day in a covered garage (MSS also has its own huge surface parking lot, but that's not a competitive option for locals). The Cal itself has been established as a magnet for visitors from Hawaii, I believe its main attraction to locals would be as an annex to MSS, offering additional dining and shopping options.
The Fremont offers the most challenges in marketing to locals. As noted, it lacks self-parking. It's only a short walk from the Cal, but along unattractive streets lined by the backs of parking garages. Its main attractions are restaurants including a very popular Tony Roma's and its video poker, particularly NSU deuces at high denominations. Some locals will want to leave the MSS-Cal cocoon for the Fremont; others won't. The marketing for these properties should stress that you don't have to, but you can, and it's not difficult or dangerous to do so (maybe security escorts should be offered to those reluctant to take the walk).
Downtown attractions such as the Smith Center and Mob Museum might offer cross-marketing opportunities for Boyd, as well as additional reasons for people to come downtown.
Both the SLS and the Boyd downtown properties illustrate the need for marketers to assess the advantages and disadvantages of their properties in regard to each type of customer they hope to attract. They must also try to ascertain the reasons customers have for not coming to their properties, and do what they can to refute or at least mitigate these objections.
A final suggestion: In a still-struggling economy, most businesses -- especially those relying on discretionary spending -- compete by offering more value, not less. Since the economic crisis of 2008, many gaming companies have downgraded pay tables, tightening rules, cut comps and otherwise reduced customer value. Especially for casinos struggling to attract customers, maybe its time for a different approach.
It's been a long time since the Palms has offered point multipliers. Instead, it allows players to earn gift cards with weekday play at a rate of 0.2 percent on video poker. That's almost equal to the point value of 0.25 percent. But the other day I got an e-mail from the Palms offering double points yesterday, a day on which play also counted toward gift cards, bringing the total value offered to 0.7 percent. The best game on which the multiplier could be earned was 16/10 "not-so-ugly" deuces, with a maximum payback of 99.73, making for a 100.4+ percent play. (On top of that, I had an American Casino Guide coupon for $50 in free play after earning 15,000 points in one day, adding 0.33 percent.) I was worried so many people would come to the Palms for the point multiplier that all the "good" machines would be taken, but that proved not to be a problem.
When I checked my e-mail last night, there was an offer for $15 in free play today or tomorrow from Station Casinos. Stations has rarely if ever made such an offer by e-mail. This offer and the Palms point multiplier seem to me to be attempts to boost coin-in totals before the end of the month, indicating that play to this point has not been up to expectations.
Another indication of desperation: A few weeks ago, the SLS, the north Strip casino that had been the Sahara, offered 10 times points on video poker. My spouse and I both went in and lost a lot of money. The other day, a host called and offered her a 5 percent rebate in free play of her loss that day. Brilliant woman that she is, she asked the host to check on my play that day to see I could get a rebate as well. Sure enough, the host called back and said I could get $150 in addition to the $350 offered my spouse.
While I was at the SLS the day of our big losses, I chatted with a host I recognized from the now-closed Riviera. She admitted the property was struggling, and was trying to attract locals. Ever helpful, I offered some free advice.
First, I will say that it's hard to attract locals to the Strip on a regular basis because of traffic and parking concerns. For those lacking comps, the restaurants and other amenities on the Strip are much more expensive than in the locals casinos or downtown. The machines, both reel slots and video poker, are generally tighter, and table game minimums are higher. To a degree this is necessary because of the higher costs of operating on the Strip.
In some respects, SLS, away from the center of the Strip, is relatively well positioned to draw locals. It's near I-15's Sahara Avenue exit and has lots of convenient garage parking, which can be entered from either the Las Vegas Boulevard or Paradise Avenue sides of the building. But the big challenge facing the SLS and other Strip and downtown properties trying to draw locals is this: What can I offer to make it worthwhile for people to drive past the Red Rock Resort, Green Valley Ranch or other major locals casinos to come to my property?
I pointed out to the host from the Riviera that the SLS's video poker pay tables are not competitive with those at the locals casinos and that when the SLS was the Sahara, it had a section called Locals Lane that featured better video poker as well as reel slots. (There was no requirement that you had to be a local to play in Locals Lane; it was open to everyone.) Bringing back Locals Lane or something like it would indicate that the SLS is willing to do something special to win their business.
Something the SLS has been doing and should build on is holding tournaments. The locals casinos don't offer many tournaments of any significant value. When what is now the Westgate was the Las Vegas Hilton, it offered monthly tournaments geared most to locals as well as larger tournaments that were open to qualifying locals. These tournaments helped build a loyal group of local customers, many of whom formed friendships not only with one another but also with casino employees. (The casino business, though largely taken over by numbers crunchers, also still is -- or should be -- a relationship business.)
Another thing the SLS might try to do is market itself as the place for locals' friends and family members to stay on the Strip. Offering locals free room nights that can be used by visitors might bring in new out-of-town customers who could be marketed to separately. The SLS is an attractive property, catering to the sensibilities of younger people. To this crowd, the resort's location away from the center of the Strip may be a disadvantage, but one that could be at least partially overcome by cooperative marketing with the Las Vegas Monorail, which stops at the property. Possibility: a free Monorail pass with every stay of more than a specified number of nights.
One thing the SLS has been doing that I don't think is likely to be effective is blitzing locals with gift offers. Although gifts have been very effective at locals casinos in getting people through the doors, I doubt they will be as good at a casino that most customers have to travel a considerable distance and/or go out of their way to reach. And then there's still the problem of getting people to play once you've gotten them in the door. If I were in management at SLS, I would consider redirecting the gift budget to dining offers. This would be in line with the overall marketing of the resort as a "foodie" destination. One thing I might to for locals is offer a discount for walking in that could be upgraded to a free meal with a certain amount of play.
Finally, Boyd Gaming has expanded its Wednesday "Young at Heart" program from the Coast locals casinos to its downtown properties, the Fremont, California and Main Street Station. This month there have been separate "Young at Heart" point multipliers -- up to 30 times points on video poker with a maximum of 100,000 multiplied points -- during the day and from 7 p.m. to midnight, as well as drawing, buffet offers and dining credits.
I think its smart for Boyd to market its downtown casinos to locals. Boyd's Coast chain has about half as many properties at Stations, its major competitor in the locals market. Two Coast properties, the Orleans and Gold Coast, are very close to each other. There is no Coast property in the northern part of the Las Vegas Valley, where Stations has Santa Fe Station, Texas Station and Fiesta Rancho.
But it's not going to be easy for Boyd to get middle-aged, middle-class residents of the outlying areas to come downtown. Panhandlers, drunken tourists, traffic hassles, parking restrictions and outdated properties are among the turn-offs. Attractive gaming offers are probably necessary but not sufficient to draw more locals. What's needed is an education effort that frankly addresses the reasons locals have for not wanting to go downtown and letting them know what Boyd has done to minimize the problems and why its worth making the trip despite the problems that can't be eliminated.
For example: The Fremont has no self-parking, only valet. Parking at other casinos along Fremont Street is no longer a good option for visitors to the Fremont who don't also want to play or eat at another casino. But, as my spouse found out only by asking, anyone with a Boyd sapphire or emerald players card can park all day for free at the California's garage, without the hassle of dealing with validation. Boyd needs to let locals know they can park downtown, in a covered garage, virtually hassle-free.
Although driving into and out of downtown is pretty easy, it's easy for those not familiar with the tangle of highways leading there to be intimidated. Any mailing aimed to get people downtown should provide maps and directions to the properties being marketed.
Of the three downtown Boyd casinos, one is right on the Fremont Street Experience and two are a short walk from it. I think this situation calls for some sophisticated marketing, especially to locals. I would try to get locals to think of one of the casinos -- Main Street Station is my choice -- as their "headquarters," with easy access to the others for those who want it as a bonus.
Main Street is the most attractive of the three properties and the farthest from the commotion of the FSE. It has a nice buffet and a brew pub, amenities that many locals should find attractive. It is connected by enclosed bridge to the Cal, where patrons can park all day in a covered garage (MSS also has its own huge surface parking lot, but that's not a competitive option for locals). The Cal itself has been established as a magnet for visitors from Hawaii, I believe its main attraction to locals would be as an annex to MSS, offering additional dining and shopping options.
The Fremont offers the most challenges in marketing to locals. As noted, it lacks self-parking. It's only a short walk from the Cal, but along unattractive streets lined by the backs of parking garages. Its main attractions are restaurants including a very popular Tony Roma's and its video poker, particularly NSU deuces at high denominations. Some locals will want to leave the MSS-Cal cocoon for the Fremont; others won't. The marketing for these properties should stress that you don't have to, but you can, and it's not difficult or dangerous to do so (maybe security escorts should be offered to those reluctant to take the walk).
Downtown attractions such as the Smith Center and Mob Museum might offer cross-marketing opportunities for Boyd, as well as additional reasons for people to come downtown.
Both the SLS and the Boyd downtown properties illustrate the need for marketers to assess the advantages and disadvantages of their properties in regard to each type of customer they hope to attract. They must also try to ascertain the reasons customers have for not coming to their properties, and do what they can to refute or at least mitigate these objections.
A final suggestion: In a still-struggling economy, most businesses -- especially those relying on discretionary spending -- compete by offering more value, not less. Since the economic crisis of 2008, many gaming companies have downgraded pay tables, tightening rules, cut comps and otherwise reduced customer value. Especially for casinos struggling to attract customers, maybe its time for a different approach.
Sunday, May 17, 2015
In praise of the buffet
Let's get this out of the way: Some people are not fond of buffets. I've never had a discussion with any of these people, but I guess their objections are these:
1. When I go out to eat, I want to be waited on.
2. There's too much food; it's an incitement to gluttony.
3. The quality of the food is not that good.
I can't argue with No. 1. That's a matter of personal preference, and if you just don't like the concept of a buffet, I can respect that.
For some people, No. 2 is a legitimate concern. Some people will sometimes eat more than they should, given the opportunity. I have been known to do this myself.
No. 3 is sometimes true. It is also sometimes true for sit-down restaurants. In both cases, the problem is with the individual establishment, not the concept.
Now, here's what's great about at least some buffets, particularly those in casinos:
1. Value. Often the buffet is expected to be a loss leader whose purpose is to get people in the door. In Las Vegas, Station Casinos appears to have adopted this approach. Add to this the fact that appetizers, accompaniments, desserts and soft drinks (sometimes even beer and wine) are included for one price, and the value is hard to beat. Some very good dinner buffets can be had in Vegas in the $15 range, which won't cover a sandwich, soft drink and dessert in most cafes.
2. Discounts. At most casinos, anyone with a player's card gets a dollar or two off the price of a buffet. At many, those with higher-tier cards get bigger discounts. Coupons with substantial savings are available from various sources, including the Las Vegas Advisor and American Casino Guide. And a buffet comp is the easiest food comp to get.
3. Speed. Since you don't have to wait for your food to be prepared, you can get out quickly. Getting in can be more of a problem. If you have a VIP-level player's card, you can get right in at many casinos. Many have shorter lines for those with comps than for customers who pay directly, rather than through their casino play.
4. Variety. If you're with a group of people who are in the mood for different cuisines, a good buffet can satisfy them all. If you want to mix Italian, Chinese and Mexican food in one meal, the buffet is the place. Also, the buffet offers a no-risk opportunity to try dishes you might not want to pay for individually at a sit-down restaurant.
5. No limits. If you want the soup and the salad, go for it. If the first portion wasn't enough, take a little more.
6. Healthy choices. As my brother recently said, "The buffet can be the worst place to eat, or the best place to eat." Most have salad bars, lots of fruits and vegetables, and other healthy options. I recently decided to make a serious effort to lose weight and improve my diet. I have found that my favorite buffets allow me to do this. I have found that the Asian stations often offer tasty and healthy choices. Some buffets have Mongolian grills. My move there is to load up a bowl with vegetables and have it cooked without any meat. With a cup of brown rice, this can serve as a main course.
Buffet rules:e Take a new plate every time you go to the line. No eating while serving yourself food. No taking food out of the buffet. Certain violations to this last one are sometimes tolerated, such as eating a piece of fruit or ice cream cone on the way out. But concealing and removing food could lead to great embarrassment if you're caught, and the presence of surveillance cameras in casino buffets means you could be caught. I would not risk it.
Buffet strategy: Survey the entire buffet before taking anything, even if you've been there before, even if you've been there recently. Take only a little bit -- some things aren't as good as they look, and if it is good, you can always go back for more. Look for opportunities to combine items from different stations. Also, some types of items may be scattered, such as soups at the salad bar and ethnic stations, such as Chinese.
Odd fact: At many buffets, the station with Mexican food is labeled "International," not "Mexican." I have no idea why.
Tipping: I generally tip 10 to 15 percent, minimum of a dollar, If I take an unusually long time or use a large number of plates or otherwise make more work for the server, I'll leave a little extra. If the buffet is exceptionally cheap, I'll tip a little more. If I have something custom-made, such as a plate at the Mongolian grill or an omelet, I'll leave a dollar.
Favorite and least favorite buffets: The best -- and priciest buffets -- in Vegas are on the Strip. I haven't tried them all, but of those I have, my four favorites are the Wynn, Bellagio, Caesars Palace (Bacchanal Buffet) Aria and Mirage.
Off the Strip, one of the best -- and again, priciest -- is Studio B at the M Resort. Friday, Saturday and Sunday dinners and Saturday and Sunday brunches are $40. The good news is that you can get a free buffet by earning same-day slot or video poker points. That $40 weekend buffet requires 2,000 video poker points, which is $2,000 coin-in. On that casino's best video poker games with skillful play that's an average loss of less than $20 -- a very good deal. Weekday dinners and lunches require fewer points, and the requirements for points earned on slots are considerably less than for video poker.
For the money, I don't think you can beat the buffet at Green Valley Ranch, which also has one of the most attractive dining rooms. Dinner there is $15, more on Friday and Saturday specialty nights. Another good buffet in an attractive room is at the Silverton. Unless you are a diamond or platinum player, expect to wait on line on Mondays, when seniors get two buffets for the price of one, and on other days when similar promotions are in effect.
My favorite low-end buffet is Fiesta Henderson, where dinner every night and brunch on Saturdays and Sundays is $9. This buffets features a Mongolian grill and the best fried chicken I've had anywhere in town. My spouse says the turkey breast is exceptionally good. There's a good salad bar and usually several vegetable selections, but not much in the way of fruit.
At the higher end of the price spectrum, the Rio offers a seafood buffet that is quite good but pricey. The Rio also has a comprehensive buffet, the Carnival World. The last time I ate at the Palms buffet, not recently, it was quite good and extensive, much improved since the George Maloof days (about the only thing there improved since new management took over).
At the places I play regularly, my least favorite buffets are at South Point and the Gold Coast. (The Orleans, under the same ownership as the Gold Coast and only about a mile away, has a better buffet.) The difference between a mediocre buffet like these and a good buffet is the difference between being able to find something to eat and being overwhelmed by all the attractive choices.
Final note: A comprehensive listing of Vegas area buffets, including hours and prices, can be found at LasVegasAdvisor.com.
Friday, March 27, 2015
Yet another strike against the Palms
When George Maloof owned and ran the Palms, I was a regular customer there. The place had its annoying quirks but offered good video poker and other benefits that made it worthwhile to play there often. Since corporate management took over, many of the perks have been taken away, along with a lot of the good video poker. Moreover, as I have described in this blog, unbelievable incompetence has been on display more or less continuously for the past couple of years.
During this time I have made several attempts to return to the Palms as a regular player, but have not found it worthwhile. In recent months about all I've done there is play enough to take advantage of one of the few positive things the new management initiated. If you earned one ticket for the weekly drawing and weren't called as a winner, they would give you $10 in free play good the next day. On $1 video poker, that requires $250 coin in -- a good deal, especially since my spouse would often play it for me. (The Palms recently wised up and now requires that you earn 10 drawing tickets to get the $10 free play.)
Today my spouse said that she wanted to go to the Palms and play for the gas cards they were giving away. She argued that she had received a pretty generous mailer from the Palms for the amount of play she had been giving them and that it might be worth it for me to give them yet another try.
The gas cards are part of a regular promotion that Palms runs called Play for Prizes. There are usually two sets of prizes, for the first and second halves of the month. Points accumulated on weekdays are used to qualify for the prizes, though players get to keep their points.
Today was the last day for the Chevron gas cards. Because we had not played during the second half of the month, we could get only what we could earn today. The lowest denomination was $5, requiring us to earn 2,500 points. That would also get us the $10 free play tomorrow. We valued the play at very close to $15 because we consider a gas card almost a cash equivalent and because the Palms' points, worth 0.25 percent, would make up for almost all of our loss on the deuces wild game (99.73 percent maximum payback) we would be playing.
So we played enough for our gas cards and went to the promotions center to cash in. At the counter, we were told that they were out of Chevron cards and we would instead be given Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf cards. I explained to the clerk that I did not consider these at all equivalent, that my car runs on gas and not on coffee, and that I did not appreciate being surprised by this news when the casino could have put up signs announcing the substitution. I asked him if I could get a rain check for a gas card. He said no. Not, "I'm sorry, I can't do that," just "no." I asked him if I could get free play instead. He said no. I asked him if I could speak with his supervisor. He said yes, and a young man came out from behind the curtain and agreed to put $5 free play on my spouse's and my accounts.
Problem solved, more or less. In the casino business, that's all that usually counts, so I told him I thought it was important that this situation be dealt with better if it comes up again. He assured me he would speak with his boss. I was satisfied with the way the matter eventually was handled, but if I had not made a fuss, I never would have gotten to speak with the supervisor. As my spouse pointed out later, many people probably just took their coffee cards and left unhappy -- especially if they had played a lot during the past two weeks and earned a lot of what they thought would be gas cards.
Here's what I think the Palms did wrong:
1. Someone assumed that gift cards of equal denomination are of equal value. My guess is that they had a surplus of the coffee cards and saw this as an opportunity to get rid of them, not stopping to think that some customers might not appreciate the substitution.
2. Because no one anticipated that some customers would be upset, no one thought to provide notice that they had run out of the gas cards. This could have been accomplished by posting signs at the entrances to the casino and at the players club.
3. If someone had been smart enough to do this, he or she might have taken the thought process a step further and tried to come up with ways to satisfy customers unhappy with the switch. No casino ever runs out of free play, and I believe this would have satisfied almost all customers. Another alternative would be to give points, which could be used for comps as well as free play.
4. The clerk at the counter who initially tried to "help" me was inadequately trained. Regardless of his own opinion on the matter, he should have expressed some sympathy for a customer who was being denied what the casino had promised. More important, he should have been the one to call in a supervisor if he couldn't satisfy the customer.
Under the best of circumstances, I am not a big fan of Play for Prizes. The prizes, usually gift cards, often have less value to me than their face amount. Plus, the process of obtaining the prizes is cumbersome. You have to go to a kiosk and get a printout of the points you earned for the promotion. This may entail waiting on line or dealing with a malfunctioning kiosk. Then you have to go to the promotions center and wait on line to get your prize. The last time I did this information had to be entered manually in a ledger before the clerk could get the prize. And, of course, there's always the possibility they'll run out of the card you wanted and give you something of much less value to you. This has happened to me before at the Palms.
As we left the casino, we stopped at the cafe. My spouse had a $10 credit and we wanted to use it to pick up a prepackaged salad. In the past I had enjoyed the gigantic chicken Caesar salads from the Palms cafe. I had noticed on previously that the size of these salads had been cut about in half. On this visit I observed that the price had also gone up!
Based on my visit today, I'd say the Palms is still badly in need of new management.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Never give up?
One of the things I do when I'm not in the casinos is read with two third-graders on
Thursday afternoons at an elementary school in Henderson. This volunteer gig, through a very worthy organization called Spread the Word Nevada, is a lot of fun and, I hope, a benefit to the kids who get some personal attention as well as help with their literacy skills.
A couple of weeks ago one of my kids brought a book about a toad and a frog who were best friends. One of the reptiles (I forget which) gave the other a hat for his birthday. The recipient loved the hat, but it was too big and came down over his eyes, which caused navigational problems.
The giver of the gift offered a solution. He told his friend to think very big thoughts before he went to bed. This would cause his head to swell to a size that would accommodate the hat. The giver sneaked into the recipient's house while he slept, removed the hat, altered it to fit his friend's head, and replaced it before dawn.
When the birthday amphibian woke up, he put on his new hat, and it fit perfectly. He was sure his friend's plan -- think big thoughts -- had worked.
The story offered me a golden opportunity to impress upon my young reading buddy what I consider to be a key aspect of human psychology -- the ease with which we reach wrong conclusions about cause and effect. Not the easiest of concepts for a third-grader to understand, but still I was surprised by his answer when I asked him what point the author was trying to make:
"Never give up!"
So many stories in our culture convey that theme that it's what jumped into his mind, irrelevant thought it was.
It's an idea I've thought about a lot. Obviously, persistence can be a virtue. If you're trying to achieve something worthwhile, and you're going about it in an informed and intelligent way, working hard to achieve your goal makes sense.
But what if what you're trying to do is impossible, or you're going about it the wrong way, or it just isn't worth the effort that will be required? In those cases, applying your efforts in another direction obviously would be a good idea.
But the here's the question I find interesting: How do you know? The folklore posits a maverick whose ideas are dismissed by those around him. But somehow he just knows that if he keeps at it, he will prove the skeptics wrong. It's just a matter of keeping at it.
But sometimes the critics are right. Even if the're not, engaging them might yield some ideas or information that could help the loner achieve his goal. But cooperation isn't as good a literary ingredient as defiance, so the stories tend to be about heroes who go it alone.
Even just periodically reevaluating one's progress might lead to the conclusion that giving up is the wiser course.
So what does this have to do with gambling, the subject of this blog?
Gambling is one of the few activities in our society in which quitting is encouraged. "Know when to quit" is on the cover of the brochures about problem gambling offered by many casinos.
The assumption behind the encouragement of quitting is that gamblers who expect or hope to win are on a futile quest because, in the long run, the house will always win.
For the vast majority of gamblers that is true. Continuing to gamble in an attempt to recover losses or obtain money to pay debts or expenses will usually result in further losses. It's better to quit when you're less behind rather than continue to play until you're more behind.
But the presumption that a gambler is destined to lose is rebuttable. As I have explained in this blog, there are ways a gambler can get a long-term advantage over the house. Even better, it is often possible for a gambler to know with a great deal of precision the amount of that advantage.
In fact, if you cannot determine the amount of your advantage or explain how you calculated your advantage, you almost certainly don't have one. Gambling is governed by math, and you have an advantage only when the numbers give you one.
Losing streaks are part of gambling, even for players who have a long-term advantage. But in gambling, unlike many other human endeavors, it's possible to know whether you should persist through adversity. If you're playing at an advantage and within your bankroll, you can power through knowing that losing will eventually give way to winning.
Thursday afternoons at an elementary school in Henderson. This volunteer gig, through a very worthy organization called Spread the Word Nevada, is a lot of fun and, I hope, a benefit to the kids who get some personal attention as well as help with their literacy skills.
A couple of weeks ago one of my kids brought a book about a toad and a frog who were best friends. One of the reptiles (I forget which) gave the other a hat for his birthday. The recipient loved the hat, but it was too big and came down over his eyes, which caused navigational problems.
The giver of the gift offered a solution. He told his friend to think very big thoughts before he went to bed. This would cause his head to swell to a size that would accommodate the hat. The giver sneaked into the recipient's house while he slept, removed the hat, altered it to fit his friend's head, and replaced it before dawn.
When the birthday amphibian woke up, he put on his new hat, and it fit perfectly. He was sure his friend's plan -- think big thoughts -- had worked.
The story offered me a golden opportunity to impress upon my young reading buddy what I consider to be a key aspect of human psychology -- the ease with which we reach wrong conclusions about cause and effect. Not the easiest of concepts for a third-grader to understand, but still I was surprised by his answer when I asked him what point the author was trying to make:
"Never give up!"
So many stories in our culture convey that theme that it's what jumped into his mind, irrelevant thought it was.
It's an idea I've thought about a lot. Obviously, persistence can be a virtue. If you're trying to achieve something worthwhile, and you're going about it in an informed and intelligent way, working hard to achieve your goal makes sense.
But what if what you're trying to do is impossible, or you're going about it the wrong way, or it just isn't worth the effort that will be required? In those cases, applying your efforts in another direction obviously would be a good idea.
But the here's the question I find interesting: How do you know? The folklore posits a maverick whose ideas are dismissed by those around him. But somehow he just knows that if he keeps at it, he will prove the skeptics wrong. It's just a matter of keeping at it.
But sometimes the critics are right. Even if the're not, engaging them might yield some ideas or information that could help the loner achieve his goal. But cooperation isn't as good a literary ingredient as defiance, so the stories tend to be about heroes who go it alone.
Even just periodically reevaluating one's progress might lead to the conclusion that giving up is the wiser course.
So what does this have to do with gambling, the subject of this blog?
Gambling is one of the few activities in our society in which quitting is encouraged. "Know when to quit" is on the cover of the brochures about problem gambling offered by many casinos.
The assumption behind the encouragement of quitting is that gamblers who expect or hope to win are on a futile quest because, in the long run, the house will always win.
For the vast majority of gamblers that is true. Continuing to gamble in an attempt to recover losses or obtain money to pay debts or expenses will usually result in further losses. It's better to quit when you're less behind rather than continue to play until you're more behind.
But the presumption that a gambler is destined to lose is rebuttable. As I have explained in this blog, there are ways a gambler can get a long-term advantage over the house. Even better, it is often possible for a gambler to know with a great deal of precision the amount of that advantage.
In fact, if you cannot determine the amount of your advantage or explain how you calculated your advantage, you almost certainly don't have one. Gambling is governed by math, and you have an advantage only when the numbers give you one.
Losing streaks are part of gambling, even for players who have a long-term advantage. But in gambling, unlike many other human endeavors, it's possible to know whether you should persist through adversity. If you're playing at an advantage and within your bankroll, you can power through knowing that losing will eventually give way to winning.
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Places we used to play
Since we started coming to Vegas about 10 years ago, we have probably played with some frequency at about 40 casinos. We're now down to about 10. In most cases -- all until quite recently -- the decision to stop patronizing a casino was ours. In the past few months, several casinos have cut off the offers that made it worthwhile for one or both of us to play there.
Over the years we have heard stories about video poker players being "no mailed" (mail offers stopped coming) and even being outright barred from playing. We learned that the players cards of those who patronized South Point only on double point days sometimes stopped working, that those who won "too much" at Ellis Island were asked not to come in any more, and that Station Casinos (slogan: "We Love Winners") had barred Bob Dancer from playing there.
But for years, we were the ones who got to decide, exclusively, where we would play video poker. We played where we thought we could make money, which meant places with good games, good players club benefits and good promotions. When any of those things changed significantly to our detriment, we were gone.
In the past 10 years, the main thing that changed was the games. Probably 90 percent or more of the changes were for the worse. There were many reasons for this. As good video poker books and software became available, more players were able to cut into the take the casinos expected from good games because a good part of that take resulted from player mistakes. Video poker, once considered just another form of slot machine, began to be seen more like blackjack, a game that players could beat. One way casinos could protect themselves was to take out high-payback games.
The recession worsened this trend, as did the additional self-inflicted financial troubles of some of the big gaming companies. In many cases players bore at least some of the burden in the form of pay-table downgrades and stingier comp policies,
In most cases we tried to work with the new realities. I think one of the biggest mistakes a player can make is to overreact to change. Even if can't do exactly what you had been doing at a particular casino, there may be other opportunities to make money there, especially if you're still getting mail offers.
But sometimes the changes are just too severe. We kept playing at several casinos as they removed one game after another, but you have to draw the line when there is nothing left that's worth playing.
The sad thing is that the public is so ignorant that these casinos have not been forced to relent and bring back better games, if not the best games they ever had.
The following is a list of some of the casinos we have stopped playing at, or are in the process of phasing out our play; the games we used to play there; and in some cases other reasons for our decision:
1. Club Fortune, Henderson, Nev. -- this neighborhood casino once had positive games, including 25 cent full pay deuces wild and $1 loose deuce deuces wild.
2. Hooters -- $1 full pay double bonus deuces wild and "not so ugly" deuces gave way to 9/6 jacks or better as the best game. We left after that came out and management decided 9/7 double bonus was too strong a game to allow point multipliers on.
3. The Stratosphere -- I think I burned out the $1 loose deuces when I hit the deuces three times in one weekend. They disappeared soon after; so did I.
4. Eastside Cannery -- $1 NSU deuces are long gone, leaving 8/5 bonus poker the best game for dollars and up. Points earned are not competitive with other casinos on the Boulder Highway, and promotions and mailers aren't making up the difference.
5. Peppermill's Rainbow -- this locals casino in downtown Henderson once had 50 cent full pay deuces. Without a players club, there's no reason to go there unless a progressive is high enough to be a positive play.
6. Jackpot Joanie's -- this chain of small casino-bars lost us as customers when it downgraded NSU deuces to "pseudo" NSU, changing the payback from 99.7 percent to 98.9.
7. Dotty's -- another group of casino-bars cut its point multipliers on video poker.
8. Arizona Charlie's Decatur -- there are good games, but you earn so few points playing them that a good mailer is needed to make playing there worthwhile. The mailers started out strong but faded with time.
9. The Palms -- My spouse still plays there a little, but all the changes since George Maloof was deposed have taken most of the value out of playing there. You can still make a little money, but not enough in my opinion to make playing there worthwhile.
10. The Orleans -- Video poker has been tight since we first played there, but for a while we got mailers with free play and giant point multipliers. When those stopped, we stopped playing there.
11. The Westgate -- When this near-Strip property was the Las Vegas Hilton, it was one of the best places to play, with the best tournaments in town, positive and near-positive $1 video poker, and great promotions. Through ownership changes, most of the benefits and the best video poker games for more than 25 cents disappeared. This was probably our biggest loss.
Over the years we have heard stories about video poker players being "no mailed" (mail offers stopped coming) and even being outright barred from playing. We learned that the players cards of those who patronized South Point only on double point days sometimes stopped working, that those who won "too much" at Ellis Island were asked not to come in any more, and that Station Casinos (slogan: "We Love Winners") had barred Bob Dancer from playing there.
But for years, we were the ones who got to decide, exclusively, where we would play video poker. We played where we thought we could make money, which meant places with good games, good players club benefits and good promotions. When any of those things changed significantly to our detriment, we were gone.
In the past 10 years, the main thing that changed was the games. Probably 90 percent or more of the changes were for the worse. There were many reasons for this. As good video poker books and software became available, more players were able to cut into the take the casinos expected from good games because a good part of that take resulted from player mistakes. Video poker, once considered just another form of slot machine, began to be seen more like blackjack, a game that players could beat. One way casinos could protect themselves was to take out high-payback games.
The recession worsened this trend, as did the additional self-inflicted financial troubles of some of the big gaming companies. In many cases players bore at least some of the burden in the form of pay-table downgrades and stingier comp policies,
In most cases we tried to work with the new realities. I think one of the biggest mistakes a player can make is to overreact to change. Even if can't do exactly what you had been doing at a particular casino, there may be other opportunities to make money there, especially if you're still getting mail offers.
But sometimes the changes are just too severe. We kept playing at several casinos as they removed one game after another, but you have to draw the line when there is nothing left that's worth playing.
The sad thing is that the public is so ignorant that these casinos have not been forced to relent and bring back better games, if not the best games they ever had.
The following is a list of some of the casinos we have stopped playing at, or are in the process of phasing out our play; the games we used to play there; and in some cases other reasons for our decision:
1. Club Fortune, Henderson, Nev. -- this neighborhood casino once had positive games, including 25 cent full pay deuces wild and $1 loose deuce deuces wild.
2. Hooters -- $1 full pay double bonus deuces wild and "not so ugly" deuces gave way to 9/6 jacks or better as the best game. We left after that came out and management decided 9/7 double bonus was too strong a game to allow point multipliers on.
3. The Stratosphere -- I think I burned out the $1 loose deuces when I hit the deuces three times in one weekend. They disappeared soon after; so did I.
4. Eastside Cannery -- $1 NSU deuces are long gone, leaving 8/5 bonus poker the best game for dollars and up. Points earned are not competitive with other casinos on the Boulder Highway, and promotions and mailers aren't making up the difference.
5. Peppermill's Rainbow -- this locals casino in downtown Henderson once had 50 cent full pay deuces. Without a players club, there's no reason to go there unless a progressive is high enough to be a positive play.
6. Jackpot Joanie's -- this chain of small casino-bars lost us as customers when it downgraded NSU deuces to "pseudo" NSU, changing the payback from 99.7 percent to 98.9.
7. Dotty's -- another group of casino-bars cut its point multipliers on video poker.
8. Arizona Charlie's Decatur -- there are good games, but you earn so few points playing them that a good mailer is needed to make playing there worthwhile. The mailers started out strong but faded with time.
9. The Palms -- My spouse still plays there a little, but all the changes since George Maloof was deposed have taken most of the value out of playing there. You can still make a little money, but not enough in my opinion to make playing there worthwhile.
10. The Orleans -- Video poker has been tight since we first played there, but for a while we got mailers with free play and giant point multipliers. When those stopped, we stopped playing there.
11. The Westgate -- When this near-Strip property was the Las Vegas Hilton, it was one of the best places to play, with the best tournaments in town, positive and near-positive $1 video poker, and great promotions. Through ownership changes, most of the benefits and the best video poker games for more than 25 cents disappeared. This was probably our biggest loss.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
