Does anyone know exactly why those 7 people sued Ameristar Casino?
When Ameristar changed the point system last August, it was written in
the fine print that video poker required 8 dollars of coin-in for 1
point. I do remember that they were advertising "more cashback"
and "more points" which wasn't exactly true because more cash or
points meant spending more money to get those points. That was
misleading. I do know that part of the lawsuit involves the food comp
fiasco of last year. A lot of people lost a lot of food comps when
you all of a sudden couldn't bank them up anymore. Personally, I
don't think this lawsuit is going to amount to much or anything at all.
What does everyone else think?
Brian
Ameristar Lawsuit
--- In vpFREE_StLouis@yahoogroups.com, "weathrman12" <weathrman12@...>
wrote:
Does anyone know exactly why those 7 people sued Ameristar Casino?
When Ameristar changed the point system last August, it was written in
the fine print that video poker required 8 dollars of coin-in for 1
point. I do remember that they were advertising "more cashback"
and "more points" which wasn't exactly true because more cash or
points meant spending more money to get those points. That was
misleading. I do know that part of the lawsuit involves the food comp
fiasco of last year. A lot of people lost a lot of food comps when
you all of a sudden couldn't bank them up anymore. Personally, I
don't think this lawsuit is going to amount to much or anything at all.
What does everyone else think?
Brian
My recollection is that for about the first 2 weeks that they started
enforcing the exp. date on food comps, they told people that in the
future, you could bank your comps and then get them when you needed
(like harrahs), but shortly thereafter, the story changed to 'you can
get a comp based on your last 5 visit ave.' which was a system that
was already in place for quite some time. So people were upset that
they started actually using the exp. dates on comps and not ignoring
them. I dont see that as grounds for a suit. As far as reducing the
comps on VP by half (like most casinos do), that is the casinos choice
and again not grounds for a suit. BTW, in the paper it mentioned that
they reduced the VP comps by 2 to 4 times, which is not correct. They
reduced the comps by 1/2 (or 2) via the coin in requirements and then
they reduced the entire comp system (if I remember correctly) by like
17%, so it was a bit of a double whammy for VP players, but the
reduction was more like 60%. Personally, I dont see why anyone would
play at Ameristar since they have poor promotions and the comps are
only slightly better than Harrahs (where you can bank comps forever)
We can only hope that Pinnicle will stir up the Duopoly market that we
have today.
Happy Royals
Jim