vpFREE2 Forums

Boycotts

#1

Add my name to the displeasure list,
   I have given the Orleans and Suncoast
each over $1000000 coin-in in 2001 and 2002.
For 2003 I have no play in either casino.

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Singer

Boycotts in gaming have no effect at all--except to the individual. Most people won't, even from an informed group as this. Out of several thousand here, there's only a handful showing their displeasure with what's going on.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            ADVERTISEMENT
                         
vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#2

John, players like you are the only hope we have for a future that includes
full pay video poker. This is really such a simple issue yet some can make
it sound so complicated. If the "coin in" at the Coasts go down, they lose
and the downgrade will be a failure. There are just too many other good
venues in LV that want a crack at your bankroll. The only way this
downgrade can work for the Coasts is if players continue to play there at
pre-massacre levels. Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be a shortage
of volunteers to help Coasts destroy the good games.
                                    Rasti$Rulz
                           Coasts Casinos = vp-hell

                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vp-heaven

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "John" <johnsr@lvcm.com>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Boycotts

Add my name to the displeasure list,
   I have given the Orleans and Suncoast
each over $1000000 coin-in in 2001 and 2002.
For 2003 I have no play in either casino.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Singer

Boycotts in gaming have no effect at all--except to the individual. Most

people won't, even from an informed group as this. Out of several thousand
here, there's only a handful showing their displeasure with what's going on.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            ADVERTISEMENT

vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#3

"Video Poker Vegas" <vpvegas@c...> wrote:

This is really such a simple issue yet some can make it sound so
complicated. If the "coin in" at the Coasts go down, they lose
and the downgrade will be a failure.

The Coasts are a business that exists to make profits. So they don't
lose if "coin in" goes down, they lose if profits go down. Casino
profits from VP aren't a direct function of "coin in". They're a
function of "coin in," the pay-offs of the game, AND the skill of the
players.

Like Einstein said, things should be made as simple as possible, but
no simpler.

Stuart (RandomStu)
sresnick2@attbi.com
http://home.attbi.com/~sresnick2/mypage.htm

#4

Casino profits from VP aren't a direct function of "coin in". They're a
function of "coin in," the pay-offs of the game, AND the skill of the
players.

You're right, but even factoring in player skill the casino still expects a
profit on each machine. A day or so ago, someone posted "expected handle" of
several machines, based on stickers they saw that hadn't been removed. Even
DW had an expected casino handle of 3% to 5%, if I recall correctly. The
point is, regardless of player skill, removing fullpay positive games is a
mistake. Casinos should be aware that having those games is good for their
bottom line, not bad.

lb

#5

"Lawrence Boxer" <ljboxer@e...> wrote:

A day or so ago, someone posted "expected handle" of several
machines, based on stickers they saw that hadn't been removed. Even
DW had an expected casino handle of 3% to 5%, if I recall
correctly. The point is, regardless of player skill, removing
fullpay positive games is a mistake. Casinos should be aware that
having those games is good for their bottom line, not bad.

If DW has a 3%-5% hold, then we can say it's good for their bottom
line relative to removing the machine & leaving empty space on the
casino floor. But relative to changing the machine to a game with
lower payoffs, we don't have enough information to know whether it's
good or bad for their bottom line.

Even the casinos themselves can only speculate on how lower-payback
machines will affect their bottom line. It will depend on how many
*bad* players (where "bad player" means anyone who plays at a
disadvantage, & would include good VP players who also are bad
players at others games in the casino, as well as good players who
bring bad players to the casino with them) reduce or eliminate their
play because of the VP downgrade.

Stuart (RandomStu)
sresnick2@attbi.com
http://home.attbi.com/~sresnick2/mypage.htm

#6

It will depend on how many
*bad* players (where "bad player" means anyone who plays at a
disadvantage, & would include good VP players who also are bad
players at others games in the casino, as well as good players who
bring bad players to the casino with them) reduce or eliminate

their

play because of the VP downgrade.

Yes, that's exactly my point. The fullpay positive machines are a
lure to advantage players, many who also play other games with better
house edge, and are often not winners at positive play anyway. And
the fact of the expected 3-5% handle shows that even the "good"
players are not expected to have much of a negative impact. It all
boils down to a poor management decision that focuses only on
wringing out a few more dollars right now, and the hell with
longterm.

lb

#7

Doesn't it also depend on how much the machine is played? I would think a better paying machine thats always being played brings the casino more profits than a bad one that sit's vacant half the time.
   Caesar's in Atlantic City put in some quarter 9/6 jacks or better a month ago. (That's good for Atlantic City.) When we went there, the machine's were almost always being played, and I noticed most of the folks made lot's of strategy mistakes. That has to be good for Caesar's bottom line.
Ned C.
The Wild Joker
randomstu <sresnick2@attbi.com> wrote:If DW has a 3%-5% hold, then we can say it's good for their bottom
line relative to removing the machine & leaving empty space on the
casino floor. But relative to changing the machine to a game with
lower payoffs, we don't have enough information to know whether it's
good or bad for their bottom line.

···

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#8

You nailed it lb. If ALL the players in this and other vp/lv group simply
stayed away from the Coasts it would make a huge difference and the
disastrous long-term results would be accelerated.

                                    Rasti$Rulz
                           Coasts Casinos = vp-hell

                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vp-heaven

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "lawrenceboxer" <ljboxer@earthlink.net>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 3:46 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Boycotts

>It will depend on how many
> *bad* players (where "bad player" means anyone who plays at a
> disadvantage, & would include good VP players who also are bad
> players at others games in the casino, as well as good players who
> bring bad players to the casino with them) reduce or eliminate
their
> play because of the VP downgrade.

Yes, that's exactly my point. The fullpay positive machines are a
lure to advantage players, many who also play other games with better
house edge, and are often not winners at positive play anyway. And
the fact of the expected 3-5% handle shows that even the "good"
players are not expected to have much of a negative impact. It all
boils down to a poor management decision that focuses only on
wringing out a few more dollars right now, and the hell with
longterm.

lb

#9

Rastis, you and I agree that removing positive machines is a bad business
decision, but I've mentioned before that I'm not a fan of boycotts and in
this case I doubt a boycott would work without major media support, which is
highly doubtful. Again, remember all the years the culinary workers
picketed the Frontier, with little exposure and even less public support.

Local players are compelled to take advantage of the best promotional
situations wherever they are, even at Coast casinos, and even if some of the
better machines are removed. Asking them to boycott a few casinos that
otherwise have some attractive promotions is unfair to them. It's a
predicament that those of us who are not locals probably can't fully
appreciate.

I still maintain that the fullpay positive machines are good for the casinos
longterm and it would be nice if there was an effective way to get that
point across to operators, short of players hurting themselves by
boycotting.

lb