Smoking bans

Will casinos every be smoke free in the next 20 years? Yet another study out showing 2nd hand smoking killing tens of thousands per year. How many studies do we need?! 50,000 a year die from 2nd hand smoke in just the USA. That is 136 a day. I already know 2 non-smokers who have died from 2nd hand smoke. Imagine one fully loaded 737 with 136 aboard crashing every day. How many crashes before FAA would ground all 737s? My guess would be 3 tops.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091015/ap_on_he_me/us_med_smoking_bans

Quote: Tommy

Will casinos every be smoke free in the next 20 years? Yet another study out showing 2nd hand smoking killing tens of thousands per year. How many studies do we need?! 50,000 a year die from 2nd hand smoke in just the USA. That is 136 a day. I already know 2 non-smokers who have died from 2nd hand smoke. Imagine one fully loaded 737 with 136 aboard crashing every day. How many crashes before FAA would ground all 737s? My guess would be 3 tops.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091015/ap_on_he_me/us_med_smoking_bans

I can't imagine casinos willingly going smoke free. Smoking is an addiction as is gambling and your degenerates are more likely to smoke. Getting rid of smokers would hurt the casinos profit. Personally I enjoy my cigars and would not frequent a casino or nightclub if they did not allow me to smoke. LAX has a no cigar smoking policy and as a result I won't go there.

I haven't vetted this source, but here's a reply to the government study - http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/institute-of-medicine-reports.html

Most businesses resist anti-smoking laws even though it seems that bars often do more business once they are smoke free. Casinos seem to be even more intent on remaining a paradise for smokers in the belief that gambling behavior and smoking behavior seem to be linked.

I know a casino in Fallon, NV went smokefree a few years ago, but I don't recall how it fared. Ofcourse its such a small place it would have no real impact on a "real" casino.

The employees must hate smokers after a while. Casino managers cling to the belief that a smoking ban will be tantamount to imposing bankruptcy on them. I'd wager the first major casino to go smoke free will make a mint! Hotels generally went smoke free for economic reasons. Sometime there will be a casino that will really be willing to take the plunge.

On-Edit: Its in Fernley, NV:
http://www.fernleynews.com/PR/Nugget_Opens_111008.html

If a smoke free casino really would make a mint then don't you think someone in Vegas would have done it already? Casinos are in the business of making money, if being the only smoke free casino in Las Vegas would make them more money then they'd do it in a heartbeat. I hear that from non-smokers all the time but there is no proof to back it up. I'd be surprised if someone like Steve Wynn hasn't looked into this and concluded that it would not enhance profits. Casinos spend a lot of money on lighting, carpet patterns, music, aroma etc to create an environment to make the most money. You really don't think that they've put as much thought into smoking vs non-smoking as they do in the carpet pattern?

Quote: JimMorrison

Casinos spend a lot of money on lighting, carpet patterns, music, aroma etc to create an environment to make the most money. You really don't think that they've put as much thought into smoking vs non-smoking as they do in the carpet pattern?

Oh, I would imagine that Steve Wynn and others have addressed the question and that the primary viewpoint has indeed been that of the bottom-line. I would imagine the various consultants have all spewed such facts and figures as are available to them. After due consideration of the various studies, including what is suspected of genetic linkages to financially and sexually risky behavior, it appears the decisions have all been the same. I have no desire to debate variance amongst casino-carpeting consultants or variance amongst smoking-and-gambling consultants. For the nonce, the conventional wisdom is that the financial benefit is to allow smoking or atleast to not be the first to dis-allow smoking. Conventional wisdom is not always correct, however. You may enjoy your cigars and brandy. Others may enjoy chocolate or coffee or other substances. It all varies with dopamine, serotonin and above all, xanthine oxidase genes. As more knowledge is discovered, the consultants may start re-writing their position papers. Fortunately for me, its not much of an issue.

Quote: FleaStiff

Quote: JimMorrison

Casinos spend a lot of money on lighting, carpet patterns, music, aroma etc to create an environment to make the most money. You really don't think that they've put as much thought into smoking vs non-smoking as they do in the carpet pattern?

Oh, I would imagine that Steve Wynn and others have addressed the question and that the primary viewpoint has indeed been that of the bottom-line. I would imagine the various consultants have all spewed such facts and figures as are available to them. After due consideration of the various studies, including what is suspected of genetic linkages to financially and sexually risky behavior, it appears the decisions have all been the same. I have no desire to debate variance amongst casino-carpeting consultants or variance amongst smoking-and-gambling consultants. For the nonce, the conventional wisdom is that the financial benefit is to allow smoking or atleast to not be the first to dis-allow smoking. Conventional wisdom is not always correct, however. You may enjoy your cigars and brandy. Others may enjoy chocolate or coffee or other substances. It all varies with dopamine, serotonin and above all, xanthine oxidase genes. As more knowledge is discovered, the consultants may start re-writing their position papers. Fortunately for me, its not much of an issue.

I don't like brandy at all. I do enjoy Capt and Cokes though.

People have choices of whether they want to smoke or not. People also have choices of whether they want to be in an environment that allows smoke. It seems to me that too many non-smokers want to cram their choices down my throat. If someone has a problem with smoke then don't go to a casino that allows smoking. If enough people feel that way then the market will solve the rest as casinos will enact rules to attract the non-smokers.

Hi, Fleastiff. I'd like to take that wager! lol, I'm sure that if the casino's thought they would make a "mint", by going smoke-free, they would have done it already. (If you still want to wager, I'm sure someone around here can drum up some odds, lol).......thanks Bart

As much as I'd like to think that the legislators had our best interests at heart when they mandated all clubs/bars in Australia (where I'm from) to be smoke free, the cynic in me makes me certain that it was a financial decision that was imposed on legislators to act and, therefore, businesses to make the business decision. And it was all to do with courts awarding damages to employees in workplaces (like clubs/bars) that permitted smoking. I am sure that, barring some special exemption for certain business establishments, that it will be a business decision that the casinos will make to go smoke free because they won't be able to find an insurance company to cover the damages from lawsuits in that specific field. Either that or the casino/business takes it upon themselves to meet the cost of those damages. Or gains an exemption, as mentioned previously.

That said, the debate here has been going on a while and whilst all clubs/bars/casinos are now smoke free there was a period before the mandatory imposition and some clubs/bars voluntarily went smoke free and they did prosper. The smoking rate in our country is down to about 20% so there is/was a huge market out there to be catered for. Of course, just going smoke free isn't going to make your business successful but it does open up a new set of customers for you if you do. Eg, myself and my partner now go out much more frequently because we enjoy the smoke free environment of clubs/bars. If it was the same environment as when I was going out as a young adult, I dare say we would not go out and all of that revenue would be lost to that particular business. I'm sure we'd find somewhere else to spend it but the point is that because the local clubs/bars are smoke free we are happy to go there for drink/meal and it is, thus, a profitable decision for them (regardless of how that decision may have been imposed upon them) to have us as customers.

We were in Vegas last year and even though we were on the 23rd floor at the MGM (beautiful room, can recommend it and worth upgrading to the larger room) we could still smell some of the smoke that probably came up the elevators and, of course, we dreaded walking through all the gaming areas. If there was a smoke free casino in Vegas then it would certainly appeal to us.

Everything is hypothetical until it is done and it isn't necessarily correct to say that if it was a profitable idea that someone would already have done it. Until it looked like becoming a reality nobody here really did it but some tried it ahead of the mandatory imposition and discovered that they could prosper because of it. It may fail in Vegas but it may also succeed even though no-one can see it succeeding now. And the very owners that say now that it won't work will be trumpeting what a bold business decision they made if/when it does. Just like politicians; they take credit for things they didn't necessarily do for the good of their customers/constituents.

Don't know what study you read , but your quoted stats here is all bull on second hand smoke . Stats on smokers probably are more true and accurate , on second hand smoke dangers , BULL____.
As far as I know , there is not one case of even one person ever dying from 2nd hand smoke anywhere . The second hand smoke studies that come out from various organizations are just a SMOKE SCREEN WITH NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS TO THEM AT ALL . You are born with the Genes that you are dealt and God will do the rest in a person's lifetime . Second hand smoke nay sayers are the biggest crock ever put upon the masses living in the United States , matter of fact , living in the entire world . Just putting my 2-cents worth in here .

Tony/Michigan