In a message dated 1/13/2003 3:47:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
greyowl50@earthlink.net writes:
The fallacy of their "experiment" is that they took an old, rundown casino
that
had years and years of smokers in it and tried to make it nonsmoking. It
still reeked of tobacco smoke.Most of the nonsmoking areas I've seen have the lowest paytables of all the
machines in the casino.How about a real fair test to see if it works???
The casino that went smoke free was near the Stardust (I forgot it's name).
It was open for quite a while, I'd say a year or so. If that wasn't long
enough to get the old smoke out, then the only way to get a smoke free casino
would be to build a new one.
There is a legitimate "test" of nonsmoking areas in Harrah's Laughlin. They
have two casino areas which are pretty well isolated from each other. The non
smoking area is about half the size of the smoking area but each has it's
share of decent VP games (which isn't a lot). I have found each side to be as
busy as the other.
While this supports the argument that a nonsmoking area can survive
commercially, it doesn't seem to show that there are hoards of people who
prefer a nonsmoking environment. Remember, this relatively small area is the
only place in Laughlin where you can find nonsmoking so it's reasonable to
conclude that most people who feel strongly about nonsmoking are already
going there. Who will become the patrons if the other casinos duplicate
Harrah's efforts?
BTW, as someone who has visited Nevada probably over 100 times in the last
decade, I do not remember the last time I saw anyone using a mechanical fan
at a VP machine. I do see them at live poker tables. I think that if there
were as much demand for a smoke free environment in the general gambling
population as there is on these forums, the casinos would respond to that
market.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]