PA gaming revenue tapering off
Harrah's Philadelphia -12.2%
Presque Isle -10.8%
Penn National -9.0%
The Meadows -8.3%
Parx -5.8%
SugarHouse -4.6%
Mount Airy -3.9%
Sands Bethlehem -3.6%
Mohegan Sun -2.4%
The Rivers -2.2%
Valley Forge +22.6%
Nemacolin N/A
Total SLOTS for PA -4.5%
Quote: pacomartinPA does not seem to have built a growth business. Slot revenue is tapering off everywhere.
The novelty is gone and they need to drive traffic to the floor besides saying "we got slots!" I know the girl doing Tarot Card readings at Rivers on NYE. Rivers seems to understand better than most that you need more than gaming.
As the horsemen in Ontario had theirs taken away a few years ago... they thought they were OWED that money because THEY allowed the slots into THEIR racetracks. I asked them which tracks they owned....which I knew was none.
In Ontario the racetracks and horsemen shared almost $4 BILLION dollars from the slots over about 14 years.
This revenue sharing is the only thing keeping harness racing going the past decade
At first, they believe that players won't notice an x% reduced return on the slots, or that blackjack is paying out at only 6 to 5, and will still buy bottled water from the gift shop if the price is $3.5. Furthermore, over the next few months the math doesn't lie and the revenue reflects the increase in profit....until...it doesn't.
After a while, people become irritated, and rather insulted, by the gouging, the "resort fee" and from being basically ripped off by the casinos. And the $3.5 water doesn't taste like a bargain. The general public knows when they're getting a fair shake, and when they're getting poked by the actuaries. And over time, patrons stop going to the casinos as frequently, or choose to stop going all together.
Attempting to squeeze every last penny possible from gambler's produces great profits for a few months, but in the long run it's a recipe for failure.
In the end, you could say that the casinos lose business over time because they choose to gamble in the "short term" rather than in the "long run".
-Keyser
Quote: KeyserPart of the problem with PA are the "bean counters" and their lack of foresight. (It's a Vegas problem as well)
At first, they believe that players won't notice an x% reduced return on the slots, or that blackjack is paying out at only 6 to 5, and will still buy bottled water from the gift shop if the price is $3.5. Furthermore, over the next few months the math doesn't lie and the revenue reflects the increase in profit....until...it doesn't.
After a while, people become irritated, and rather insulted, by the gouging, the "resort fee" and from being basically ripped off by the casinos. And the $3.5 water doesn't taste like a bargain. The general public knows when they're getting a fair shake, and when they're getting poked by the actuaries. And over time, patrons stop going to the casinos as frequently, or choose to stop going all together.
Attempting to squeeze every last penny possible from gambler's produces great profits for a few months, but in the long run it's a recipe for failure.
In the end, you could say that the casinos lose business over time because they choose to gamble in the "short term" rather than planning ahead for the "long run".
-Keyser
great post
1. Prices would go up every month.
2. Each month, the number of waiters/waitresses would go down, to decrease overhead. Those that remain wouldn't speak English (so that they could exploit tax breaks by hiring minorities and immigrants.)
3. Each month, the plates would get smaller, as would the portions, after all, "research shows that people won't notice a difference."
4. Senior staff waiters/waitresses would be replaced once they had more than a year or two on the job to reduce benefit packages.
5. Water would cost $3.5.
5. Overtime, robot servers would replace human servers.
6. Once revenue was in the red, a restaurant resort fee or chew tax would be added to your bill as would a glass and dish wash fee.
-Keyser
1 minute long distance phone call could be had for $9.86 with $3.50 each extra minute
breakfast buffet there was $20.99
internet around $15 a day that works out to $465 for a month CRAZY
and how about those cabs all charging 20 cents per mile SURCHARGE for gas....that works out to about $4 for every gallon they are using not bad when its going for $2.60 a gallon
$7 for a slice of bad pizza over at the Flamingo?
come to think of it I have never eaten at PARIS and I have stayed there 5 times...guess I am cheap
Quote: KeyserPart of the problem with PA are the "bean counters" and their lack of foresight. (It's a Vegas problem as well)
At first, they believe that players won't notice an x% reduced return on the slots, or that blackjack is paying out at only 6 to 5, and will still buy bottled water from the gift shop if the price is $3.5. Furthermore, over the next few months the math doesn't lie and the revenue reflects the increase in profit....until...it doesn't.
After a while, people become irritated, and rather insulted, by the gouging, the "resort fee" and from being basically ripped off by the casinos. And the $3.5 water doesn't taste like a bargain. The general public knows when they're getting a fair shake, and when they're getting poked by the actuaries. And over time, patrons stop going to the casinos as frequently, or choose to stop going all together.
Attempting to squeeze every last penny possible from gambler's produces great profits for a few months, but in the long run it's a recipe for failure.
In the end, you could say that the casinos lose business over time because they choose to gamble in the "short term" rather than in the "long run".
-Keyser
In PA BJ pays 3 to 2
Quote: KeyserPart of the problem with PA are the "bean counters" and their lack of foresight. (It's a Vegas problem as well)
At first, they believe that players won't notice an x% reduced return on the slots, or that blackjack is paying out at only 6 to 5, and will still buy bottled water from the gift shop if the price is $3.5. Furthermore, over the next few months the math doesn't lie and the revenue reflects the increase in profit....until...it doesn't.
After a while, people become irritated, and rather insulted, by the gouging, the "resort fee" and from being basically ripped off by the casinos. And the $3.5 water doesn't taste like a bargain. The general public knows when they're getting a fair shake, and when they're getting poked by the actuaries. And over time, patrons stop going to the casinos as frequently, or choose to stop going all together.
Attempting to squeeze every last penny possible from gambler's produces great profits for a few months, but in the long run it's a recipe for failure.
In the end, you could say that the casinos lose business over time because they choose to gamble in the "short term" rather than in the "long run".
-Keyser
In PA, though, they have good BJ rules and for now they can't touch that by state reg. That's in peril no doubt, so I will say you are on the money with this post, but neither BJ nor Craps got victimized in PA [so no 6-5 for example].
The state made sure when they approved gambling that they were getting a piece of the action right off the top. I would say this meant the slots had to be the cash cow.
The bean-counters when called in are put in a funny position. It's similar to big companies where they investigate the bottom line problem and find the CEO and other big shots are walking away with insane salaries, bonuses, and golden parachutes, whether or not the company is doing worth a damn. The accountants get shook up and some of them probably mutter "this is turning me into a Communist!". So they turn in their recommendations and what do they say? Not "cut back on the CEO's compensation" etc, no, rather "hey you guys better lay some people off, get rid of the old duffers making too much, and see if you can cut back on hours for the rest"
Quote: odiousgambit
The bean-counters when called in are put in a funny position. It's similar to big companies where they investigate the bottom line problem and find the CEO and other big shots are walking away with insane salaries, bonuses, and golden parachutes, whether or not the company is doing worth a damn. The accountants get shook up and some of them probably mutter "this is turning me into a Communist!". So they turn in their recommendations and what do they say? Not "cut back on the CEO's compensation" etc, no, rather "hey you guys better lay some people off, get rid of the old duffers making too much, and see if you can cut back on hours for the rest"
In most cases cutting the CEO's salary is not going to make or break the organization. Cost cuts have to be wide. But I digress.
It would seem to me that the best way to increase gaming revenue in PA would be to cut the Commonwealth's mafia-level slot skim of 55% to 45-55% with the mandate that the payouts get bumped to say 94-95%. We all here know that the 95% of that extra payout will not hit the door. The casino management knows it. The politicians in Harrisburg do not, so unless say someone starts a write-in campaign to send me to Harrisburg things will not change.
I still want to know if a friend of mine is right that the video poker here is not real video poker, also.
Quote: AZDuffmanI still want to know if a friend of mine is right that the video poker here is not real video poker, also.
I decided to look this up. Class III is the desirable type.
Quote: linkHow do you know the machine is Class II or III? Look for the small display of a bingo card on the machine If you don’t see a bingo card, it’s probably Class III
http://www.casinocenter.com/class-ii-vs-class-iii-video-poker-machines/
Quote: answer man in linkDelaware has Class II Video Lottery Terminals, not Class III slot machines like Las Vegas, Atlantic City and Pennsylvania
http://robison.casinocitytimes.com/article/ask-the-slot-expert-has-the-programming-changed-on-video-poker-machines-60344
so I think your friend got PA confused with DE
Quote: pacomartinValley Forge +22.6%
Perhaps charging a membership fee is the answer.
I visited that dull Valley Forge last year.
Unless you spend at least $10 at their restaurants or bar, or are a visitor to their hotel, you have to buy a a three month or annual membership in order to gamble there.
Quote: odiousgambitI decided to look this up. Class III is the desirable type.
http://www.casinocenter.com/class-ii-vs-class-iii-video-poker-machines/
http://robison.casinocitytimes.com/article/ask-the-slot-expert-has-the-programming-changed-on-video-poker-machines-60344
so I think your friend got PA confused with DE
Thanks for the look-up. I will check the links later, right now deciding if to work a title on Festivus or go play poker.
Quote: TankoPerhaps charging a membership fee is the answer.
I visited that dull Valley Forge last year.
Unless you spend at least $10 at their restaurants or bar, or are a visitor to their hotel, you have to buy a a three month or annual membership in order to gamble there.
VF is required to charge the fee by law because of the type license they were issues, i.e. hotel small casino license. That said they have been growing year after year. The place is small but is in a good location and the tables are almost always full. Service and return play & comps are decent and the fee actually keeps out many problem customers. They are taking customers from Chester, Parx and Sugerhouse
The only reason a track is given slots is to have horses. No horses, no casino. Can't blame horse people for wanting what is legally owed to them. I don't understand the condescending attitude You..re displaying towards them given the context the casinos were to support horse racing with slot revenues and cannot have slots without them. It's a legally binding deal nobody was forced into.Quote: coilmanPOOR HORSEMEN are going to be crying if they start taking more money away from them.
As the horsemen in Ontario had theirs taken away a few years ago... they thought they were OWED that money because THEY allowed the slots into THEIR racetracks. I asked them which tracks they owned....which I knew was none.
In Ontario the racetracks and horsemen shared almost $4 BILLION dollars from the slots over about 14 years.
This revenue sharing is the only thing keeping harness racing going the past decade
Quote: onenickelmiracleThe only reason a track is given slots is to have horses. No horses, no casino. Can't blame horse people for wanting what is legally owed to them. I don't understand the condescending attitude You..re displaying towards them given the context the casinos were to support horse racing with slot revenues and cannot have slots without them. It's a legally binding deal nobody was forced into.
They were installed at tracks because well tracks were accepted gambling places and the government wanted to expand this gambling without having to ask the people. SURE horsemen agreed to have them at all tracks...if they didn't get them in 1997 in Ontario harness racing would have been for ribbons by early 2000. They (the tracks) were suppose to use 5% of what they got off slots to improve the racing game.....guess how much went to improvements at most tracks? start with zero and add zero
Horsemen were suppose to invest in better horses.... we saw more and more bottom end claimers ($5000-6000) the ones that used to carry a $3000 price tag....but all was good because those horses were racing for purses double what they were before.
The only people not to benefit from the horsemen and tracks getting billions off slots??? Yeah you guessed it the fans in the stands
The powers that be saw that nobody was doing any marketing to grow the game over 14 years and well guess what happens...bye bye golden goose laying those golden eggs
Quote: KeyserThe general public knows when they're getting a fair shake, and when they're getting poked by the actuaries. And over time, patrons stop going to the casinos as frequently, or choose to stop going all together.
-Keyser
I agree with your whole statement except the part about the actuaries. We have nothing to do with setting returns on gaming devices.
It proves nothing conclusively but it sure seems that the $20 bills my wife feeds the machines last a much shorter time than they used to on a consistent basis. When she gets tired of losing, she stops playing. If she gets to that point faster, she plays less overall. If she "feels" like she is winning she will keep playing even if her bankroll is consistently going down.
