discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 452
December 27th, 2011 at 11:13:45 PM permalink
Well thanks for that awesome reply, WoV, I owe you some disc golf discs whenever I see you! Are you in Vegas?

In truth, you have put way more thought into the bussiness implementation than I ever have.

I have put my time into the software that makes this possible.

I'm not sure if you read my post to MathEx, but this capability is a rare technical achievment (MathEx and a bunch of pure-ists might disagree).

But stepping back, in my mind, the only way to reduce the costs of live gaming must somehow involve chipless wagering. I think the concept is starting to dig in.

I dont know why a big company like Station Casinos still thinks they need to have 6 craps tables in every one of their properties... why don't they just have one "big game" as I call it in each casino, and have the other 5 casinos in town also brodcast THEIR big games to all 6 casinos... customers get to play all 6 live games (1 local, 5 remote), always filled every time, they can even roll the dice and be tipped by all the players in all the casinos, and Station only needs to run 6 tables vs 36. And BTW, those 6 tables are each being manned by one "unskilled" stickman, and the security cost drop to nill because there can be no player-to-player theft and any dealer theft is hard to get away with.

Talk abut your cost savings, and that's without even adding the competitive gaming aspects.

Why doesnt somebody make this proposal to the Station casinos and see what they say, and then approach old ShuffleMaster and see if they can hook their system up to a simple multiple-site video feed.

Why am I not worried about this idea being stolen / copied ? I'm not worried about it, my system has capabilities beyond any of what I've already talked about, and those are patent pending concepts.

I can demo all of this for you LIVE right now if you like, I can even demo the "live data -reloads" proving that "warm starts" of live gaming operations is definately feasible. I showed this stuff to the Wizard last year live at the Red Rock casino.


Thanks again for your response.
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 452
December 27th, 2011 at 11:33:36 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

Where's the incentive for the casino to end up in a direct competition like you describe?

Casino's don't compete on price. They compete on the experience you get for the price. The experience is different at each joint, and I reckon that's the major differentiation between the LV casinos. Yes, some of this is price/offers, but a lot of it is surroundings and service.

I'm not your target market, but the scenario you describe sounds unappealing to me.




HMMM.. alright, how about this idea used for on-line casinos? I know when it comes to Craps, right now its not the live interactive kind, but what if it was? What if the "on-line" casino WAS the gaming malls themselfs, syndicated out to whomever wants to play, and NOW the on-line customers know its for real, unlike playing on-line craps against a suposid RNG in the computer owned by the casino being played against.

If the gaming mall can't get even one casino to risk money in a competitive way, my systems also have an option that allows any player playing the game to press a botton that says "BE THE HOUSE". If they press it and if they are approved (bankroll, etc), they assume the risks of the house in the subsequent shooter's roll (they can't be the shooter, and they can't do any wagering on it)... the request to "Be the house" is queued up, and anyone wanting to take the risk of a shoot of the dice can do so, and thus the gaming mall won't need any casino to sign up at first. I would put this rule in place and then allow casinos to take any risk ONLY if they are willing to participate in live competitive gaming and offer at least as good a game as the gaming mall already provides.

My whole focus is on the end user getting the very best deal and SCREW the friggin casinos!

Of course the gaming commision would have another field day, but that's another story.

Thanks for your interest!
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 452
December 28th, 2011 at 12:06:04 AM permalink
Quote: pacomartin



...

There is no evidence that competing over house advantage grows the overall market.

It may be a short term panacea for one casino, and clearly some players make out, but it's not clear that you can grow the market that way.



If the Internet piece of this can be achieved, it would grow the market. Please see the reply to CessPit, this is not really about growing the market, its about letting gaming take full advantage of modern technology, and part of this is standardization of the gaming interfaces that allow such exchanges and inter-vendor plug-in abilities, handicapped access, the whole 9 yards. ONE set of standards should be used to define the entire system and allow OPEN ACCESS by any vendor who wants to join in and compete. Once that is accomplished the end-user costs will plummet even more, so instead of .4929 to .5070 house edge on the pass line, it will be more like .4993 to .5007.

Like I said before, screw the big casinos!

In my opinion, the days of keeping secret the FACT that casinos all make money upon the ignorance of their customer's (about basic probability and statistics in gaming) are numbered. I think the concept of supporting a huge resort like the Excalibur upon these income sources (your average 7 out of 10 gamers who haven't a clue) is also diminishing.


Thanks for your interest.
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
Tiltpoul
Tiltpoul
Joined: May 5, 2010
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1573
December 28th, 2011 at 3:23:01 PM permalink
Quote: discflicker

In my opinion, the days of keeping secret the FACT that casinos all make money upon the ignorance of their customer's (about basic probability and statistics in gaming) are numbered. I think the concept of supporting a huge resort like the Excalibur upon these income sources (your average 7 out of 10 gamers who haven't a clue) is also diminishing.



No disrespect to your opinion, but I think the opposite is true. Casinos are seeking new gamblers who don't have a clue about house edges by offering more options outside of the casinos (at least in Vegas, but to a degree, across the country and world). As nearly every responder has posted, the experience of playing craps in a casino cannot be simulated on the screen. The technology may be there, and you may have developed a fantastic system, but your "screw the big casinos" concept isn't going to fly, unless it gives private individuals an opportunity to enter the market (and I'm not talking about the banking option you are referring to).

To put it another way, think about online retailing. Logic says that EVERYBODY should shop online, since you can get cheaper prices and low overhead. A very small faction of the population shops online exclusively (say 3%), about 10 % shop online frequently, another 22 % shop online semi-frequently, 35 % shop online infrequently, and 40 % shop rarely or never shop online. Even those in the 10 and 22 category still go to stores to check products out in person.

Stores like JCPenney's and Sears are trying to capitalize on this trend, setting up computer kiosks where you can place online orders in the store. Of course, the technology is primitive by what you've developed, but the marketing side to the consumer is basically the same result. It may streamline processes, it may save on inventory and lower costs associated with shrink and delivery, but in the end, the consumer still wants to experience shopping.

Casino patrons still want the casino experience, but electronic gaming hasn't replaced traditional gaming. And players aren't boycotting casinos to the point of changing odds to player's favor, so while you may have a small faction of the population (3% of the gambling population is VERY small, and probably too generous) who would like the idea, you have basically created a Wide-Area system of Rapid Roulette or Rapid Craps.

It's a novel idea, but the real-world applications and hurdles are simply too great, even with the modifications you suggest.
"One out of every four people are [morons]"- Kyle, South Park

  • Jump to: