vpFREE2 Forums

NON SMOKING AREAS FOR GAMBLERS

#1

In a message dated 1/4/2006 8:36:52 AM Pacific Standard Time,
lainiewolf702@yahoo.com writes:
Lettuce Entertain You it
has around 30 restaurants ALL ARE NON-SMOKING. Every saturday night
there is at least a 2 or 3 HOUR wait.
I just wanted to remark once more on smoking, casinos and restaurants. I
mentioned to a heavy smoker the discussion about smoking in Vegas. He spends 100
per cent of his vacation in Vegas, six weeks a year. He said he would have no
problem if the casinos made it all no smoking--provided they gave you
convenient areas to go to to smoke. The only place he says he ever has a problem in Los
Angeles the airports where once in it is difficult to get out. I think this
maybe true for many smokers--while the limitation on their bad habit is
inconvenient they really adapt easily to it.
China

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

#2

I think this maybe true for many smokers--while the limitation on
their bad habit is inconvenient they really adapt easily to it.

What are you smoking?? :slight_smile:

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, China15334@a... wrote:

#3

I think this maybe true for many smokers--while the limitation on
their bad habit is inconvenient they really adapt easily to it.

On the day before my surgery where they cut out about 7 feet of my
guts and threw them away, I would push the IV bottle rack ahead of me
to the shipping dock and light up. Had to take two elavators to do
it. So yes I adapted. Have not smoked since that surgery. One of
the best things I ever did was quit smoking.

DWK

#4

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deuceswild1000"
<deuceswild1000@y...> wrote:

>

> I think this maybe true for many smokers--while the limitation

on

> their bad habit is inconvenient they really adapt easily to it.

On the day before my surgery where they cut out about 7 feet of my
guts and threw them away, I would push the IV bottle rack ahead of

me

to the shipping dock and light up. Had to take two elavators to

do

it. So yes I adapted. Have not smoked since that surgery. One

of

the best things I ever did was quit smoking.

A few years back a movement broke out to ban smoking from all
csinos. A UNLV study concluded a smoking ban would cause a 10%
reduction in revenue. Gamblers standing outside puffing away
instead of being inside banging on the machines. 10% is more than a
recession, probably less than a depression, but would cause massive
layoffs and the corresponding loss of business in other sectors with
layoffs. Casino executives, many of whom are anti-smoking (They
wouldn't allow you to smoke cigarettes in their homes, but will run
to fetch ashtrays in the casinos), are a hundred times more vehement
when it comes to revenue reduction. Not even one megaresort has
tried as a business plan a smoking ban. A movemnet to implement or
expand non smoking areas has a far better chance to succeed, putting
the chances at somewhere between slim and none.

···

DWK

#5

Part of the problem with these studies is that they don't quantify how business will improve because of the lack of smoking. That is, there are a number of people who won't go to casinos or play extensively because they's too much smoke in the casino. These studies never get to those people, so the numbers are always skewed.
   
    Did non-smoking poker rooms cause a depression? Hardly. In fact, they brought about tremendously enhanced profitability for casinos.

  You only have to look at what happened with all the poker rooms to understand that there's a significant market opportunity for the property that gets it right for non-smokers. Think about it. Almost all the poker rooms are completely non-smoking since players refused to play in "smoking" poker rooms. The market shifted because of consumer demand. I'll bet that if five years ago, you asked smoking poker players what would be the impact of poker rooms going non-smoking, you would have gotten the same dire predictions that the casinos get when they ask about going non-smoking today. Instead, the rooms fill to overflowing with non-smoking patrons, who give the casinos lots and lots of money.
   
  Lainie

  A few years back a movement broke out to ban smoking from all
csinos. A UNLV study concluded a smoking ban would cause a 10%
reduction in revenue. Gamblers standing outside puffing away
instead of being inside banging on the machines. 10% is more than a
recession, probably less than a depression, but would cause massive
layoffs and the corresponding loss of business in other sectors with
layoffs. Casino executives, many of whom are anti-smoking (They
wouldn't allow you to smoke cigarettes in their homes, but will run
to fetch ashtrays in the casinos), are a hundred times more vehement
when it comes to revenue reduction. Not even one megaresort has
tried as a business plan a smoking ban. A movemnet to implement or
expand non smoking areas has a far better chance to succeed, putting
the chances at somewhere between slim and none.

···

mickeycrimm <mickeycrimm@yahoo.com> wrote:

DWK

---------------------------------
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less

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

#6

Lainie Wolf wrote:

  You only have to look at what happened with all the poker rooms to
understand that there's a significant market opportunity for the
property that gets it right for non-smokers. Think about it. Almost
all the poker rooms are completely non-smoking since players refused
to play in "smoking" poker rooms. The market shifted because of
consumer demand. I'll bet that if five years ago, you asked smoking
poker players what would be the impact of poker rooms going
non-smoking, you would have gotten the same dire predictions that the
casinos get when they ask about going non-smoking today. Instead,
the rooms fill to overflowing with non-smoking patrons, who give the
casinos lots and lots of money.

Poker rooms are a very small profit center for a casino. The average rake is
pretty small compared to other games such as slots or most table games. Poker
tournaments are where casinos make money from poker.

  --Brett

#7

Brett, I have to admit -- I know almost nothing about "regular" poker. I thought that the average rake was about 7% -- and the casinos don't put their own money at risk. Is this not correct? Plus, I thought that poker players don't get many of the other perks that slot players get, making them just as (if not more) profitable to the casino than some other players.
   
  I couldn't really find stats on poker's contribution to casinos bottom-line profitability, but logic dictates that if the casinos are adding (and expanding) poker rooms (and removing other games to do so), than that's because poker increases profitability relative to other alternatives.
   
  What am I missing?
   
  Lainie

···

vex <vexicon@spamarrest.com> wrote:
  Poker rooms are a very small profit center for a casino. The average rake is
pretty small compared to other games such as slots or most table games. Poker
tournaments are where casinos make money from poker.

  --Brett

---------------------------------
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less

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

#8

Poker brings in the players who also play craps, BJ, etc. It also
brings in their spouses who play at slot machines all day long.

It's almost like how Circus Circus has the Adventuredome. They could
make that all gaming space, but the families now have a place for
their children to go while they are gambling. It gives people an
option that will bring in other revenue-generating (gambling-loss)
business.

···

On 1/9/06, Lainie Wolf <lainiewolf702@yahoo.com> wrote:

Brett, I have to admit -- I know almost nothing about "regular" poker. I thought that the average rake was about 7% -- and the casinos don't put their own money at risk. Is this not correct? Plus, I thought that poker players don't get many of the other perks that slot players get, making them just as (if not more) profitable to the casino than some other players.

  I couldn't really find stats on poker's contribution to casinos bottom-line profitability, but logic dictates that if the casinos are adding (and expanding) poker rooms (and removing other games to do so), than that's because poker increases profitability relative to other alternatives.

  What am I missing?

  Lainie

vex <vexicon@spamarrest.com> wrote:
  Poker rooms are a very small profit center for a casino. The average rake is
pretty small compared to other games such as slots or most table games. Poker
tournaments are where casinos make money from poker.

  --Brett

#9

Years ago a friend of mine ran backgammon tournaments on the East
coast.

When they instituted a no-smoking ban, business actually increased.
They saw players they hadn't seen for years, who had stopped playing
tournaments because they couldn't stand the smoke.

Meanwhile, all of the smokers remained, but simply smoked it up
outside in between competing.

#10

Lainie Wolf wrote:

Brett, I have to admit -- I know almost nothing about "regular"
poker. I thought that the average rake was about 7% -- and the
casinos don't put their own money at risk. Is this not correct?
Plus, I thought that poker players don't get many of the other perks
that slot players get, making them just as (if not more) profitable
to the casino than some other players.

  I couldn't really find stats on poker's contribution to casinos
bottom-line profitability, but logic dictates that if the casinos are
adding (and expanding) poker rooms (and removing other games to do
so), than that's because poker increases profitability relative to
other alternatives.

  What am I missing?

Most poker rooms take a rake of anywhere from 3-10%, so your average of 7% is
probably fairly close. The main thing is, most poker rooms are fairly small
compared to the amount of floor space that is taken up by much more profitable
slot machines. Sure, slot/vp players earn more perks (most of the time... I
actually earn more players club points per hour in my local poker room that my
wife does on slots) but I'd imagine in the long run, the slots and table games
are still more profitable.

It makes good business sense to add on extra poker space during the latest poker
"boom". With poker players come non-poker playing spouses, SO's, and friends.
Less maintenance, less need for surveillance (though it's certainly not
overlooked, but since the players are playing against each other instead of the
house, the house isn't as concerned about cheating and "advantage" players), not
to mention the ability to bring in tournaments, which would certainly add to the
bottom line.

I certainly would like to see some actual statistics to back up whether or not
the poker rooms are a true "profit center" or if they're just installed in order
to gain profit in other areas due to parasitic play, i.e. I play poker and my
wife plays slots at the same time. If she's dumping two or three Benjamins in to
the slot machines during the time I play poker and I'm playing even, they're
making their money from her, not me. So it's to their advantage to entice me to
come play poker and bring my wife, or my non-poker friends that will play craps,
roulette, BJ, slots, etc.

  --Brett

#11

my son is a big poker player and he gets very little
in comps, especially in new jersey. rooms are not
comped unless you play in the high stakes games for 10
hrs. or more. there is a poker rate, but that varies
from hotel to hotel. poker rooms are profitable
according to my slot host, because the players demand
very little..lunch or dinner is usually limited to 1
hr. or you lose your seat.

···

--- vex <vexicon@spamarrest.com> wrote:

Lainie Wolf wrote:
> Brett, I have to admit -- I know almost nothing
about "regular"
> poker. I thought that the average rake was about
7% -- and the
> casinos don't put their own money at risk. Is
this not correct?
> Plus, I thought that poker players don't get many
of the other perks
> that slot players get, making them just as (if not
more) profitable
> to the casino than some other players.
>
> I couldn't really find stats on poker's
contribution to casinos
> bottom-line profitability, but logic dictates that
if the casinos are
> adding (and expanding) poker rooms (and removing
other games to do
> so), than that's because poker increases
profitability relative to
> other alternatives.
>
> What am I missing?

Most poker rooms take a rake of anywhere from 3-10%,
so your average of 7% is
probably fairly close. The main thing is, most poker
rooms are fairly small
compared to the amount of floor space that is taken
up by much more profitable
slot machines. Sure, slot/vp players earn more perks
(most of the time... I
actually earn more players club points per hour in
my local poker room that my
wife does on slots) but I'd imagine in the long run,
the slots and table games
are still more profitable.

It makes good business sense to add on extra poker
space during the latest poker
"boom". With poker players come non-poker playing
spouses, SO's, and friends.
Less maintenance, less need for surveillance (though
it's certainly not
overlooked, but since the players are playing
against each other instead of the
house, the house isn't as concerned about cheating
and "advantage" players), not
to mention the ability to bring in tournaments,
which would certainly add to the
bottom line.

I certainly would like to see some actual statistics
to back up whether or not
the poker rooms are a true "profit center" or if
they're just installed in order
to gain profit in other areas due to parasitic play,
i.e. I play poker and my
wife plays slots at the same time. If she's dumping
two or three Benjamins in to
the slot machines during the time I play poker and
I'm playing even, they're
making their money from her, not me. So it's to
their advantage to entice me to
come play poker and bring my wife, or my non-poker
friends that will play craps,
roulette, BJ, slots, etc.

  --Brett

__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL � Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com