Casino idea

This idea is based loosely on rakes for poker tables.

A very small casino like the Golden Gate Casino (the oldest hotel in Las Vegas) has a limited pit with 2 craps tables, 1 roulette table, and 13 other tables (mostly blackjack). Using average returns per table for downtown Las Vegas this pit makes $12K per day.

Do you think this idea would work? Can you imagine a pit where you pay a $40 entrance fee to play.
(a) Craps tables require a $5 pass line bet, but then you can lay all the free odds you want, hardways pays true odds, as does the field ( both the 2 and the 12 pay triple), and all the other proposition bets pay true odds. Bets are limited to $25 except for hardways and and single throw bets which are limited to $5
(b) The roulette ignore the 0 and the 00 so that it pays even money. Bets are limited to $25
(c) Blackjack is single deck, deal to the bottom, DAS not allowed, dealer stands on soft 17 (player has 0.000423 EV), but only a flat $10 bet is allowed

The idea is that if 300 people paid the admission fee that would be $12K. The casino would make money on pass line bets, bad blackjack play (card counting wouldn't work since it is only flat betting), and the risk of ruin which I believe would make money on people who simply lose their money even though there is no real HA.

Using the Golden Gate as a model, they also have 275 slot machines.

Right now the Golden Gate makes something less than $1 million per month in gaming revenue. We don't know how much less. A million a month is $32,877 a day, which assuming the $12K mentioned earlier would mean the slots make $76 per day per machine. The average is $90 per machine per day for downtown. We have to consider that the Golden Nugget probably brings in more for their slots. The final accounting seems consistent.

Do you think this radical idea of charging for the pit would attract enough people to increase revenue?

Would you put down $40 for a chance to play even odds (except for pass line)?

Do you think crowd control would be a problem? It would be much easier in an enclosed room with a combination of hand stamps and tickets to control people coming and going. If they buy an entrance ticket and then give it away to someone else, you would lose too much revenue. But an enclosed room would steal a lot of the energy out of a casino.

Since this pit area could only handle 100 players at max, perhaps another system could be invented to charge either an entrance or an hourly fee. You know $5 up front and then $1 for every 15 minutes. It would involve some kind of electronic bracelet and cash up front or credit cards deposited.

There are all kinds of kooks in casinos. I've seen people start hitting the table claiming that they were gypped because the casino advertised that they were the friendliest place. If a casino said they were playing no house advantage then people could go crazy. Perhaps this danger is a standard problem in any casino and would be no worse in this one.

Very interesting idea.

Yes, if something like this became available, I would consider checking it out. However, I am sure the comps would be horrible (just kidding).

Good point, probably comps would only be available on the slots. You'd still get plenty of free drinks.

The principal means of trying to attract gamblers to downtown is better odds on craps than the strip (3X,4X,5X)
Binion's & Four Queens offers 5x odds
El Cortez, Golden Gate, Las Vegas Club, Plaza, Stratosphere offer 10X odds
Main Street Station offers 20x but other two Boyd casinos (Fremont & California) have only 2X odds

In blackjack there are a few 6:5 tables, but mostly they try to attract players with low minimums.

Roulette is the same thing-low minimums.

But pit revenue is plunging same as it is everywhere else. I have to think that there is some imaginative way to attract people to the pit other than girls on poles.

Why couldnt they offer better odds on craps anyway? In Australia the hardways pay 9.5-1 and 7.5-1, the 2/12 pay 33-1, 3/11 pay 16-1, any craps pay 7.5-1. The tables still make plenty of money.

Quote: Aussie

Why couldn't they offer better odds on craps anyway? In Australia the hardways pay 9.5-1 and 7.5-1, the 2/12 pay 16-1, 3/11 pay 16-1, any craps pay 7.5-1. The tables still make plenty of money.

Well there is a theory that American casinos have screwed themselves. In the obsession with making the games more profitable they have diminished interest in gaming to the point that they are massively overbuilt and people stay away from the games because of high minimums and poor odds. They think that people are stupid and won't play any more if they improve the odds.

An old time dealer (early 1990's) told me that they used to play the games for coins in downtown Vegas. He said you let everyone play and then you use simply pay more attention to the high rollers. This seems to be the vision you see in old movies where everyone is crowded around the high roller cheering and shouting and getting a little piece of the action. Now the vision is more like private rooms where Chinese men sit around in solitude and scowling like they are reading stock market reports.

Gaming revenue was almost 40% higher in Downtown Vegas in the early 1990's then it is today. People who support the rule changes simply point out that there wasn't as much competition back then.

See, I tend to agree with you, that people would incorporate proposition bets into their normal play more if they knew they were only facing 5% HA instead of 10%. What is interesting is that there is not more competition in Vegas on this basic level. The increased free odds is one attraction, but it is primarily a way to pull people downtown.

Some casinos actually operate in a similar fashion. All the cardrooms in Washington State simply rent a chair at an hourly rate as one of the Players banks the game. And ofcourse the California card rooms run pretty much the same way with a players syndicate doing the banking and hiring unemployed actors to be the dealers.

In the reality of the Las Vegas market where alternatives are available, I do not think an entrance fee would work. Its sort of like trying to introduce a new computer operating system: it may be better than what already exists but it is not better enough to make the transition to the newer system worthwhile.

The market is declining. The casinos want to be slot parlors and realize that they make their money on slot machines. The real gaming pits are now viewed as simply thinks you need for the license and for the atmosphere that slot players desire.

Slightly better odds at the craps tables? Think of that Borgata history making roll: beginners who just finished with an introductory lesson. Do you think they would have even understood the concept of better odds? Do you think they would have paid forty dollars to attend that lecture?

Think too of a double zero wheel getting action while a nearby single zero wheel features a bored dealer without any players. Would people really be seeking a better gamble in return for a forty dollar admission fee when some players won't even step down a few feet to the single zero wheel?

Harrah's made a fortune on the fanny-pack tourists who are ignorant of gambling. No matter what your opinion of The Evil Empire is, it certainly proved that most people just don't really want to do anything more than feed in coins and press a little red button. And they ain't gonna pay no forty dollars to do it.

Well the slot parlor idea ultimately isn't working.

Slots are down 21% from their peak on the strip. I think there is too much competition with local slot parlors. The only thing that is saving the Vegas strip from complete collapse is baccarat, which is soaring to record heights.

Blackjack, craps, roulette, Let it Ride, Pai Gow Poker and 3 Card Poker are all dropping like crazy.

While I agree with you that this idea may not work for the bulk of gamblers, I just thought it might work for a specialty casino. Some sort of a different option.

I would absolutely LOVE something like this, being able to do hop bets for even money or no-zero roulette would be AMAZING... especially the no-zero roulette.

>Well the slot parlor idea ultimately isn't working.
Sure it is. All over town its working. Outlying areas have Burger Bar with Slots. Then there is Locals Casino with Slots. Then there is Slots A Fun and everybody else in town. Slot parlors been working for decades. Its just that now, it takes so much to get to Vegas and so much to get around Vegas and you spend so much on the room that your market no longer consists of slot players. It consists of clubbers and tourists.

>Blackjack, craps, roulette, Let it Ride, Pai Gow Poker and 3 Card Poker are all dropping like crazy.
Casinos seem to be doing there level best to make sure they all die off.

>While I agree with you that this idea may not work for the bulk of gamblers,
>I just thought it might work for a specialty casino. Some sort of a different option.
Oh yes. It just might work the way Baccarat used to be: Evenings only, in a special alcove, more mature dealers, evening dress, great looking shills, chandelier, etc.
Sort of an exclusive private gambling reserve, by invitation only type thing.
But it would be a small number who would partake of such a boutique casino.

Quote: FleaStiff

>Well the slot parlor idea ultimately isn't working.
Sure it is. All over town its working. Outlying areas have Burger Bar with Slots. Then there is Locals Casino with Slots. Then there is Slots A Fun and everybody else in town. Slot parlors been working for decades. Its just that now, it takes so much to get to Vegas and so much to get around Vegas and you spend so much on the room that your market no longer consists of slot players. It consists of clubbers and tourists.

But it would be a small number who would partake of such a boutique casino.

I meant the slots are not working for the strip anymore. They are too common. PA hit a record $200 million for March 2010. When the numbers come out for the Vegas strip in a few weeks, they just might dip below $200 million (it is a possibility).

I cited the example of the Golden Gate with it's 15 tables that makes $12K per day (pit gaming revenue) and has 100 seats in the pit. In July 2005 - June 2006 the downtown rooms jumped by $20 for room rates, and $10 for "other charges" from store purchases to entertainment. There were no extra amenities added but the room rates were so high on the strip that it carried over to downtown. Without any appreciable increase in costs, the owners had all this extra money coming in and got million dollar bonuses.

I'm not trying to change the world. I just think there is room for a business plan that might cater to the less than 1% of the tourists in Vegas that would like to gamble at even odds, and would pay a fee for the this right. In the process maybe revenue might go up a couple of million per year. The questions are crowd control, how to manage expectations, and see what it would do to deviation in return from the pit. A casino that is used to an average return of $12K per day per day would have trouble managing swings of several hundred thousand dollars.

But I think that instead of paying $40 to get into the pit it would be better to have a device with a $40 deposit, that adds a $1 charge every 8 minutes that you are in the pit plus a $5 daily fee (up to $40 max). The device would have to be cheap enough so that if someone walks out with it, it costs less than $40.

The question is could you attract 300-500 people a day to play in this casino, and meantime collect extra money based on bad blackjack play, pass line bets in craps, and from people losing their bankroll.

Managing expectations might be difficult since some people would still lose all their money very quickly. They might object to being charged time in the pit when they have a big loss.

===============
I read somewhere that over 90% of blackjack players will "take even money" when they have a blackjack against a dealer Ace. Although "even money" is basically another way of saying you'll take insurance, even people who never take insurance because it is a sucker bet, will always take even money. Yet any website will tell you that statistically you are better of not taking "even money".

This dealer reasoned that player would throw in a pair of tens against a dealer Ace for half their bet. This combination happens more often than player blackjack against a dealer Ace. He called this variation Casino Surrender and took out a patent on the game. Now he tries to market it at casinos. You don't see it very often since players find it confusing. It's just one of those little twists that help the casino make money.

My pay as you go casino is one of those rare ideas that doesn't try to trick the player. It just creates a unique environment that hopefully will attract more individuals than normally play in these small casinos. It would be a different way to play, in an environment that is increasingly uniform. However, at the same time many people who wander into the casino will walk out.

>I meant the slots are not working for the strip anymore. They are too common.
Too common or too geographically remote now that casinos are everywhere.

>My pay as you go casino is one of those rare ideas that doesn't try to trick the player.
You mean a casino where the owner goes broke? (Atleast thats the way a casino owner is likely to think).

Have you checked the Nevada statutes and Gaming Board Regs? I'm not certain Nevada would allow this concept of Pay a fee to play a neutral game. You might want to say: Rent a Room, Buy a wrist band and play at the NoGreenWheel. The regs are likely to say that you can't restrict access to select portions of the public and that the wheel MUST have atleast one green slot on it.

Quote: FleaStiff

>
>My pay as you go casino is one of those rare ideas that doesn't try to trick the player.
You mean a casino where the owner goes broke? (Atleast thats the way a casino owner is likely to think).

Have you checked the Nevada statutes and Gaming Board Regs? I'm not certain Nevada would allow this concept of Pay a fee to play a neutral game. You might want to say: Rent a Room, Buy a wrist band and play at the NoGreenWheel. The regs are likely to say that you can't restrict access to select portions of the public and that the wheel MUST have atleast one green slot on it.

I think that the one who tries this would be a casino that is already going broke. I don't think someone would try this to increase revenue. I wouldn't be messing with the slots, just changing how the pit is played.

I'll check the regulations. But ultimately we are just changing payouts which has to be legal under regulations. As for restricted access, the casinos have the right to ask a card counter not to play. It seems that the experimental casino can ask people who have not bought a wristband not to play.

The wheels would still have a green slot, but they just change the pay table to push.

I think you have to tie it in with room sales. That way you get the food sales, the t-shirt sales, as well as the gaming.

I actually think the biggest problem would be blackjack. With craps and roulette there would be very tangible changes made to payouts which anyone could appreciate. With blackjack you could switch to a single deck with full pay, but you would have to restrict the player to something approaching flat betting so that the card counters don't eat you alive. The player may feel ripped off because he paid a fee and now he feels as if his play is restricted. Besides the obvious switch to a single deck, he may not appreciate the subtleties of small rule changes . You might be able to balance out this anxiety by displaying prominent placards showing the basic strategy.

If you only offer pay for play at craps and roulette it probably wouldn't generate enough revenue to be worth the additional effort of policing it.

It just goes to show you. Hooters may know how to sell greasy food, and t-shirts, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you can run a casino. They paid so much for that property and the renovations that it is ridiculous.

There is a big difference between banning a specific player and a generalized banning of entry to the Fair Game Pit.

I agree, a casino that is on the brink of bankruptcy might try this.

Declaring no bets allowed on green and then treating green as a push is fine, but check the regs first.

Baccarat, craps, High Roller Blackjack are so close to being even, I don't know if a formal Actually Even game is going to prosper.

Quote: pacomartin

I actually think the biggest problem would be blackjack. With craps and roulette there would be very tangible changes made to payouts which anyone could appreciate. With blackjack you could switch to a single deck with full pay, but you would have to restrict the player to something approaching flat betting so that the card counters don't eat you alive. The player may feel ripped off because he paid a fee and now he feels as if his play is restricted. Besides the obvious switch to a single deck, he may not appreciate the subtleties of small rule changes . You might be able to balance out this anxiety by displaying prominent placards showing the basic strategy.

I wouldn't bother with single deck. Use multiple decks and a CSM, but add in a few more favourable rules, like early surrender or 5/6 card charlies. Then you can allow a range of betting without fearing the counters

How would you adjust Baccarat? Make the commission on Banker be 3.869 percent?

I don't think an admission to a casino would work in a region where entrance to other casino would be free, even if the guaranteed HA was zero on all games (not that it is possible to do so anyway), including slots. But let's think about why this is:

(1) Most gamblers are uneducated. Take all of that revenue under "Slot Revenue" and that is "uneducated gambler" revenue. So paying $40 for a zero house edge game vs $0 for a 5% advantage game means nothing to them. So you've lost about 60% of your market already.

(2) Competition from nearby casinos would wipe them off the map. All it would take is another casino with various 0 HA promotions to take people away. Offer a bank of 0.1% slot machines, or even bonus days for player's cards, or promotions at Blackjack and its other table games.

What I think would work is the idea of paying admission to play the best table games at the lowest limits. For example, a Chicago area casino offers $5 blackjack reservations for $20/hour. If you offered the reservation at a lower price with a liberal game, you might get interest.

Also a club might work, where you pay an admission price or membership fee with enhanced "Benefits", such as free meals, a free cab ride/limo ride to the airport, or even 12 free nights in one of their rooms per year, for say, $1,000/year, almost like a VIP club that you pay to get into and automatically are a "Diamond member".

But I don't think a flat admission charge for better games will work.

I don't think that you could do slots. Most of them are not server based. With slots I think you would want them to switch to zero HA at random times for 10 minutes. Only slots that are currently being played would be eligible. The inducement to the player would be to keep playing so you catch the zero HA times. That is a different strategy which would not work for Hooters. A small older casino won't have any server based games. You can't switch banks of EPROM chips.

Salting high paying machines into your mix is very popular in Pachinko parlors in Japan. Some will pay back 150%. I don't like this idea as it leads to fights once the high payoff machines are discovered. I think you have to wait until you have servers are the norm and use the above procedure.

This would not appeal to the mass market. It would be a way of drawing in an additional customers who look for this kind of twist.

Competition might be minimal. It would take some work, and if the casino is making money it won't risk the status quo. Remember Hooters is facing bankruptcy. It is also too small and too isolated to attract much walk in traffic.

I like the $20/hr idea. It encourages the player to play for the entire hour. You get a fee and it encourages the player to stay the whole hour. No down time. But it wouldn't be a major revenue generator. Probably worth less than $1K per day maximum. The casino needs to increase revenue by $10K per day to barely stave off bankruptcy, and $14K per day to break even.

I am skeptical about the club idea. People want to get things for free at casinos, not pay large annual fees. Besides Hooters is not a locals casino. I saw the MGM MIRAGE lets people put a non-refundable $500 deposit down when they check in. They won't get any of it back, but they can charge meals and sundries over the course of their stay. In return they get upgraded room, limousine ride, and various VIP perks.

I can't see this being legal under Nevada regulations. Heck, even the pool areas that offer games must be open to the public. I don't see how you restrict games to those who pay a fee. The masses would avoid the place like the plague.

Quote: ruascott

I can't see this being legal under Nevada regulations. Heck, even the pool areas that offer games must be open to the public. I don't see how you restrict games to those who pay a fee. The masses would avoid the place like the plague.

Any place that charges an entrance fee is open to the public, if no one with the requisite entrance fee is turned away.

I've stayed out of this conversation because I really don't know if its a good or bad idea, impossible to enforce or even legal.


But a thought crossed my mind. Something similar is already in use Resorts Atlantic City.

They have 2 BJ tables where bets from $2 to $5 require a 25¢ fee posted before cards are dealt. I don't know how successful it is, or what other rules apply. But I assume that it's 3:2. The minimum at those tables to avoid the 25¢ fee is $10.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

BJ tables where bets from $2 to $5 require a 25¢ fee posted before cards are dealt. The minimum to avoid the 25¢ fee is $10.

This allows the casino to still advertise Two-Dollar Blackjack but only offer it under a much higher house edge than the ten dollar player faces. I think its a bit dishonest to call it 2.00 blackjack if not only do you play against a higher house edge but are clearly being treated as a cheapskate.

Singapore just enacted a 73.00 dollar a day entrance fee for a local to enter a casino. This is not an entitlement to a neutral game, its just an entrance fee imposed to allay fears that locals will become problem gamblers.