aceofspades
aceofspades
Joined: Apr 4, 2012
  • Threads: 366
  • Posts: 6506
April 17th, 2012 at 8:04:22 PM permalink
Why do casinos (most notably Caesar's AC) raise the $100 minimum to $200 on weekend evenings despite there being no market for it? I have been at a $100 table with 2 or 3 others and they changed to $200 once the shoe was finished at a seemingly random time of evening. Despite everyone at the table informing them they were leaving once it switched to $200, they refused to keep it at $100. Even more head-scratching was the fact that there were two other $200 minimum tables completely open - with nary a player. I inquired of the PB why they refused to keep a $100 table open where they would have 3 or 4 players prospectively playing the whole night rather than opening yet another $200 table and he replied "It is what it is"

WOW!
aluisio
aluisio
Joined: Sep 15, 2010
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 293
April 17th, 2012 at 8:07:21 PM permalink
I don't know how it works in Vegas, so correct me if I am wrong. In many casinos that I have been to, always that the minimum was raised those who were already playing at that table could keep their previous amounts, let's say: keep betting $100 until they decide to leave the game.
No bounce, no play.
aceofspades
aceofspades
Joined: Apr 4, 2012
  • Threads: 366
  • Posts: 6506
April 17th, 2012 at 8:09:52 PM permalink
Quote: aluisio

I don't know how it works in Vegas, so correct me if I am wrong. In many casinos that I have been to, always that the minimum was raised those who were already playing at that table could keep their previous amounts, let's say: keep betting $100 until they decide to leave the game.




That would have been fine with me BUT, the table was informed there would be no "grandfather clause" to allow us to maintain our $100 min. All players from that shoe forward would be required to abide by the new table minimum. So, instead of having a full $100min. table and two empty $200min tables, they chose to have three empty $200min tables. It still confounds me.
aluisio
aluisio
Joined: Sep 15, 2010
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 293
April 17th, 2012 at 8:13:42 PM permalink
Was there someone obviously counting? Maybe they just wanted to give 'a message'; otherwise it doesn't make sense...
No bounce, no play.
aceofspades
aceofspades
Joined: Apr 4, 2012
  • Threads: 366
  • Posts: 6506
April 17th, 2012 at 8:15:11 PM permalink
Quote: aluisio

Was there someone obviously counting? Maybe they just wanted to give 'a message'; otherwise it doesn't make sense...




Nah, nothing obvious at all. This has happened every time Friday night rolls around in Caesar's AC - it seems they figure if all they have are $200 min then people will be forced to play it. However, I think with the current economy (especially the economy of AC), keeping any players at a table is better for business than driving them away.
WongBo
WongBo
Joined: Feb 3, 2012
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 2126
April 17th, 2012 at 11:46:28 PM permalink
Seems to me the message is clear,....there are 7 non-Caesars casinos in AC, enjoy yourself somewhere else.
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief. - Proverb.
rainman
rainman
Joined: Mar 28, 2012
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1485
April 18th, 2012 at 12:10:16 AM permalink
This tactic is employed at a casino here in wa. Its clearly done to force u to play a higher limit. they do it during peak times . i noticed lately there keeping one lower limit table open. I think thier plan wasnt working too well.
JB
Administrator
JB
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 334
  • Posts: 2089
April 18th, 2012 at 1:00:27 AM permalink
Quote: aluisio

Was there someone obviously counting? Maybe they just wanted to give 'a message'; otherwise it doesn't make sense...


If someone was counting and the casino was sweating their action, the casino would either back them off or force them to flat-bet, not make them bet more.
brianparkes
brianparkes
Joined: Feb 26, 2012
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 74
April 18th, 2012 at 1:10:18 AM permalink
It is likely a decision from way up on the corporate ladder with the idea that if they raised the limits it would bring a higher level clientele in if they knew they wouldn't have to be playing with low limit players on the table. Obviously they don't give the floor staff the authority to change it as needed to reflect the actual play in the pit. It is a form of micro-managing from higher up that doesn't always result in the best service for the guests. Maybe in the past they had complaints from high limit players that the reason they don't play there is because they don't want to play with low limit players and this was the change made to accomodate them, but there has not been a reassesment of that procedure change to see if it has been working (from your observation it has obviously been not working).
kaysirtap
kaysirtap
Joined: Nov 1, 2011
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 55
April 18th, 2012 at 1:58:05 AM permalink
Changing table limits is not simply about supply and demand. Although, if there is literally zero demand at a given table minimum, then the decision to go to that table minimum doesn't make sense unless there is some hidden motive. A simplistic example of the basic theory goes something like this: a dealer can deal faster to one $600 player than to six $100 players. Of course, some managers are not able to find an appropriate balance between increasing profits and alienating customers.

  • Jump to: