In a message dated 8/6/2004 8:35:15 PM Pacific Standard Time,
swmoretp@aol.com writes:
Harrah's Entertainment Wins 585 Honors in Casino Player's Best in
Gaming Awards
Casino Player is given away free at Harrah's. So the vote is tilted towards
them.
That only tells me Harrah's has smarter management than their competition.
It is simply SMART to do that, and DUMB of the others not to.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
And if every other casino were just as "smart" to give away a magazine or send out ballots for a different reader poll the end result would be the same for the consumer. Bad information. Reminds me of the local LV "best of" polls that have Olive Garden as best Italian restaurant in Las Vegas.
At 09:45 AM 8/7/2004, you wrote:
Casino Player is given away free at Harrah's. So the vote is tilted towards
them.That only tells me Harrah's has smarter management than their competition.
It is simply SMART to do that, and DUMB of the others not to.
I do not think anyone has stated that Harrah's has dumb management.
I agree with you, that for their management's goals they have smart
management. They are buying out a huge chunk of the casino business
and I am sure their stockholders appreciate this. They are
excellent at what they do. The problem is for the person who is a
serious VP or table game player and not for their management.
Increasing their percentage on every game and reducing their
overhead (employees) is a heavy part of what their management has
done. As more casinos are gobbled up by Harrah's and MGM, why
should they comp you well to have you come to their store when they
might have the only place to play around? My hope is that some
casinos stay independent and become "nitch" casinos, offering better
games to serious players while the big boys attract the tourist,
uneducated gaming dollars.
One other thing, Harrah's employees should always smile and give you
great customer service. It is drummed into them and they are
disiplined if they do not do this.
Victoria
Al Rogers is a known consumer advocate in Vegas when
it comes to wrong doing by casinos. This is his
report about an incident at the Horseshoe after the
Harrah's purchase.
Mr Rogers was later told to leave the Horseshoe,
perhaps because he complained to both the gaming board
and HET management.
Hopefully the attached file comes through.
Victoria
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Attachments aren't allowed on vpFREE.
I'm familiar with the Horseshoe incident and it is
very interesting. We may have had a previous
link on vpFREE? The Yahoo search capability
is so limited now I don't even try to use it.
vpFREE Administrator
On 8 Aug 2004 at 10:17, Victoria Rosado wrote:
Al Rogers is a known consumer advocate in Vegas when
it comes to wrong doing by casinos. This is his
report about an incident at the Horseshoe after the
Harrah's purchase.
Mr Rogers was later told to leave the Horseshoe,
perhaps because he complained to both the gaming board
and HET management.
Hopefully the attached file comes through.
Trying again, it says it is attached but it did not
come through???
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--- Victoria Rosado <ros4144@yahoo.com> wrote:
Al Rogers is a known consumer advocate in Vegas when
it comes to wrong doing by casinos. This is his
report about an incident at the Horseshoe after the
Harrah's purchase.
Mr Rogers was later told to leave the Horseshoe,
perhaps because he complained to both the gaming
board
and HET management.
Hopefully the attached file comes through.
Victoria
Do a cut and paste to include the article in the text of your main
message and it will come through.
Rick
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:
--- Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:
> Al Rogers is a known consumer advocate in Vegas when
> it comes to wrong doing by casinos. This is his
> report about an incident at the Horseshoe after the
> Harrah's purchase.
> Mr Rogers was later told to leave the Horseshoe,
> perhaps because he complained to both the gaming
> board
> and HET management.
> Hopefully the attached file comes through.
> Victoria
>
Trying again, it says it is attached but it did not
come through???[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I'm familiar with the Horseshoe incident and it is
very interesting.
vpFREE Administrator
Fill us in.
Scot
--- Rick & Lucky Lucy <luckylucy39@earthlink.net>
wrote:
Do a cut and paste to include the article in the
text of your main
message and it will come through.Incident at the HorseshoeView Thread | Post Response
Return to Index |
Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg
Green Chip: Las Vegas
Posted By: Al Rogers
<mailto:…@…com?subject=Incident at the Horseshoe>
on
12 May 04, 12:59 p.m.
Email I sent today to the Horseshoe and to Harrah's.
The names of the casino
employees were in the email, but I omitted them
here:
---------------------------------------------------
Harrah�s often claims to support �responsible
gaming.� However, responsibility
was not evident in the conduct of your employees in
an incident, which I would
like to bring your attention. It occurred Tuesday,
May 11, 2004, between
approximately 8 PM and 9:30 PM, at the Las Vegas
Horseshoe.
At table BJ-41 (one of your 6 to 5 games), an
obviously severely intoxicated
patron was playing large stacks of red chips. The
patron was so drunk that he
could not even stack his chips. He repeatedly
knocked the stacks over, and
chips were scattered all over the layout, and a few
were on the floor. Though
he was playing from $100 to $200 per hand, he only
had red chips, apparently
at his request.
He was behaving obnoxiously, sometimes throwing his
cards, sometimes walking
away from the table mid-hand, etc. Eventually, his
antics caused your pit
personnel to instruct security guards to stand by
the table to keep bystanders
back. The other players who were at the table left,
and the drunk was playing
alone, at a de facto �private table.� Amazingly, the
cocktail waitress kept
bringing him alcohol.
At one point he was so drunk, he could not even pick
up his cards. The
Assistant Casino Manager, ... came over, picked up
the cards, and played the
patron�s hand for him. When a concerned citizen
asked the cocktail waitress
why they were still serving him alcohol, she replied
that he was a known
regular, was staying in the hotel, and they did not
care how drunk he gets
because he doesn't get overly belligerent regardless
of how much he loses, and
he tips well.
A crowd was gathering to watch. Some of the crowd
was starting to heckle the
floor supervisor, ..., asking why he did not
terminate play because of the
patron�s obvious intoxication. Mr. ... ignored the
questions, and play
continued, and the serving of alcohol continued.
After the patron nearly fell down a couple of times,
the Gaming Control Board
was called, due to the flagrant violation by your
employees of Nevada Gaming
Regulation 5.011, which states, in pertinent part:
5.011 Grounds for disciplinary action. The board and
the commission deem any
activity on the part of any licensee, his agents or
employees, that is
inimical to the public health, safety, morals, good
order and general welfare
of the people of the State of Nevada, or that would
reflect or tend to reflect
discredit upon the State of Nevada or the gaming
industry, to be an unsuitable
method of operation and shall be grounds for
disciplinary action by the board
and the commission in accordance with the Nevada
Gaming Control Act and the
regulations of the board and the commission. Without
limiting the generality
of the foregoing, the following acts or omissions
may be determined to be
unsuitable methods of operation:
1. Failure to exercise discretion and sound judgment
to prevent incidents
which might reflect on the repute of the State of
Nevada and act as a
detriment to the development of the industry.
2. Permitting persons who are visibly intoxicated to
participate in gaming
activity.
3. Complimentary service of intoxicating beverages
in the casino area to
persons who are visibly intoxicated.
A Gaming Control Board agent responded, and
instructed Mr. ... to terminate
the patron�s play. The Agent then left. However, Mr.
... failed to stop play,
despite apparently telling the Agent that he would
do so. The crowd was
becoming unruly, at which time the security shift
supervisor, ..., arrived on
the scene. In response to an observer�s polite
question about why play was not
stopped, Mr. ... snapped, �That�s between the casino
manager and Gaming, and
is none of your business.�
Subsequently, at least two individuals called Gaming
back, and the Agent was
re-dispatched to the Horseshoe. Pending his return,
play continued. The patron
was so incapacitated, he once stood on a total of 6.
After the Agent arrived the second time, play was
finally halted, and the
patron staggered away, leaving hundreds of dollars
of his chips on the table.
No effort was made to escort the patron to his room,
or assist him in any way.
Mr. ... and his subordinates simply let him walk
away without his chips. Mr.
... subsequently placed the chips into racks, and
took them in the direction
of the cage, without any other employees
accompanying him. It did not appear
to witnesses that any verification of the total was
made prior to Mr. ...
departing with the racks of chips.
The fact that this patron was, according to the
cocktail waitress, a known
regular drunk, losing player, does not justify or
excuse what happened. Your
employees failed miserably in the discharge of their
duties under Nevada
regulations, and I�m sure under Harrah�s internal
policies as well. The
patron, a known drunk or otherwise, should have been
cut off long before
Gaming had to be called.
I hope that Harrah�s will take corrective action,
including appropriate
reprimands and additional training for Mr. ..., Mr.
..., Mr, ..., the cocktail
waitresses, and everyone else who was involved in
this sordid situation. It
was truly an embarrassment to Las Vegas and to the
gaming industry.
Al Rogers
------------------------------------------------------------
I'll post the response, if any.
I've posted the entire thread from Al's incident at the Shoe,
including 2 followup posts that weren't included in Victoria's post.
Since the format of that post was difficult to read I re-posted the
same info again....
Harrah's often claims to support "responsible gaming." However,
responsibility was not evident in the conduct of your employees in an
incident, which I would like to bring your attention. It occurred
Tuesday, May 11, 2004, between approximately 8 PM and 9:30 PM, at the
Las Vegas Horseshoe.
At table BJ-41 (one of your 6 to 5 games), an obviously severely
intoxicated patron was playing large stacks of red chips. The patron
was so drunk that he could not even stack his chips. He repeatedly
knocked the stacks over, and chips were scattered all over the
layout, and a few were on the floor. Though he was playing from $100
to $200 per hand, he only had red chips, apparently at his request.
He was behaving obnoxiously, sometimes throwing his cards, sometimes
walking away from the table mid-hand, etc. Eventually, his antics
caused your pit personnel to instruct security guards to stand by the
table to keep bystanders back. The other players who were at the
table left, and the drunk was playing alone, at a de facto "private
table." Amazingly, the cocktail waitress kept bringing him alcohol.
At one point he was so drunk, he could not even pick up his cards.
The Assistant Casino Manager, ... came over, picked up the cards, and
played the patron's hand for him. When a concerned citizen asked the
cocktail waitress why they were still serving him alcohol, she
replied that he was a known regular, was staying in the hotel, and
they did not care how drunk he gets because he doesn't get overly
belligerent regardless of how much he loses, and he tips well.
A crowd was gathering to watch. Some of the crowd was starting to
heckle the floor supervisor, ..., asking why he did not terminate
play because of the patron's obvious intoxication. Mr. ... ignored
the questions, and play continued, and the serving of alcohol
continued.
After the patron nearly fell down a couple of times, the Gaming
Control Board was called, due to the flagrant violation by your
employees of Nevada Gaming Regulation 5.011, which states, in
pertinent part:
5.011 Grounds for disciplinary action. The board and the commission
deem any activity on the part of any licensee, his agents or
employees, that is inimical to the public health, safety, morals,
good order and general welfare of the people of the State of Nevada,
or that would reflect or tend to reflect discredit upon the State of
Nevada or the gaming industry, to be an unsuitable method of
operation and shall be grounds for disciplinary action by the board
and the commission in accordance with the Nevada Gaming Control Act
and the regulations of the board and the commission. Without limiting
the generality of the foregoing, the following acts or omissions may
be determined to be unsuitable methods of operation:
1. Failure to exercise discretion and sound judgment to prevent
incidents which might reflect on the repute of the State of Nevada
and act as a detriment to the development of the industry.
2. Permitting persons who are visibly intoxicated to participate in
gaming activity.
3. Complimentary service of intoxicating beverages in the casino area
to persons who are visibly intoxicated.
A Gaming Control Board agent responded, and instructed Mr. ... to
terminate the patron's play. The Agent then left. However, Mr. ...
failed to stop play, despite apparently telling the Agent that he
would do so. The crowd was becoming unruly, at which time the
security shift supervisor, ..., arrived on the scene. In response to
an observer's polite question about why play was not stopped, Mr. ...
snapped, "That's between the casino manager and Gaming, and is none
of your business."
Subsequently, at least two individuals called Gaming back, and the
Agent was re-dispatched to the Horseshoe. Pending his return, play
continued. The patron was so incapacitated, he once stood on a total
of 6.
After the Agent arrived the second time, play was finally halted, and
the patron staggered away, leaving hundreds of dollars of his chips
on the table. No effort was made to escort the patron to his room, or
assist him in any way. Mr. ... and his subordinates simply let him
walk away without his chips. Mr. ... subsequently placed the chips
into racks, and took them in the direction of the cage, without any
other employees accompanying him. It did not appear to witnesses that
any verification of the total was made prior to Mr. ... departing
with the racks of chips.
The fact that this patron was, according to the cocktail waitress, a
known regular drunk, losing player, does not justify or excuse what
happened. Your employees failed miserably in the discharge of their
duties under Nevada regulations, and I'm sure under Harrah's internal
policies as well. The patron, a known drunk or otherwise, should have
been cut off long before Gaming had to be called.
I hope that Harrah's will take corrective action, including
appropriate reprimands and additional training for Mr. ..., Mr. ...,
Mr, ..., the cocktail waitresses, and everyone else who was involved
in this sordid situation. It was truly an embarrassment to Las Vegas
and to the gaming industry.
Al Rogers
On June 5th, I was walking through the Horseshoe (I had not played or
watched any of the games), I was approached by three security guards.
One of the guards asked me, "Haven't you been '86'ed' from this
property?" I replied no, and asked why he thought I should have
been "86'd." The guard replied, "After you called Gaming a couple of
weeks ago about that drunk, the shift manager you complained about
told us that if you ever return, we have to tell you to leave the
property."
They were polite, and seemed to be embarrassed by what they were
doing. There was no attempt to "backroom" me, no demand for
identification, and no threats made. They did not read the trespass
act to me. I promptly complied with their request, and left the
premises. They did not follow me to the door.
On August 6th, Al reported:
He said that they had contacted the victim in the original case, and
the matter is still "under investigation," as is the subsequent
complaint about my ejection. It's surprising to me that such a
seemingly simple, straightforward investigation would take this long,
but that's what he told me. I got the impression that he didn't want
to say much at all.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote: