Glimmers of hope for AC this summer?

[Tarzan]

This last weekend the boardwalk was bustling with activity and the number of people in the casinos was seemingly more than it's been in a long while with the warmer weather. Is there hope that AC will get it's share or a more reasonable share of visitors due to the beach and boardwalk this summer even though so much competition has opened up in neighboring states or does this mean more beachgoers than gamblers?

For blackjack players, Pennsylvania rules are better and AC is still pushing the same old crappy Hit 17, 6to5, etc. a la Harrah's origin out there that will quickly clean them out and send them looking to play elsewhere... permanently. Will AC try to be competitive or will they cling onto the extra little gouge they make for dear life even if it means losing business and putting the building blocks in place for financial suicide? Only time will tell but with summer kicking in and the tourists starting to pack in the boardwalk, it might be time to think about keeping AC competitive and to hope that the boardwalk and beach serve as added incentive to retain business.

 

[Midwestern]

im afraid the logic works backwards tarzan. the only thing that would encourage a casino to embrace more liberal rules would be an ABSENCE of betting public. i.e. no one plays their game at .56 house edge, so they reduce it to .35 to attract gamblers again.

the more pedestrian traffic that AC gets, the more money they will continue to make from ploppys playing 6:5. which will not encourage AC to change ANY rules, because as the old adage says.... why fix it if it ain't broke?

 

[junior_counter]

Problem is, it is broke. Isn't it? Aren't profits still declining in parallel with worse rules?

 

[tthree]

Bean counters

Unfortunately bean counters can always find money on paper. The problem is nothing happens in a vacuum. The people being squeezed reach a point at which they alter behavior. Bean counters efforts to save a sinking ship rarely helps and quite often is the ultimate cause of demise. We see it in government when the tipping point is reached and higher tax rates start generating smaller tax revenue.

I saw it in my business where, against my advice, rates where raised to make up for falling revenue. There is huge overhead and maximizing total revenue rather than unit profit was called for but we lost close to $1,000,000 and valuable clients before the bean counters were removed from the equation. I dont know how many companies I used to deal with for services I needed, drove me, a customer who wanted to stay with a trusted company for a lifetime, away never to do business with them ever again. All over a tiny piece of profit that would "add up" across the customer base. Well that tiny fraction from each customer lost them a much larger fraction of their customer base.

Now these idiotic bean counters are going to be the final nail in the coffin for AC casinos.

 

[Thunder]

AC doesn't have to worry about PA during the summer. Most of the people in PA will be coming back to AC then as PA doesn't have the boardwalk and the beach. Also let's be honest, does the average ploppy even understand how much AC's terrible rules affect them??

 

[Thunder]

AC doesn't have to worry about PA during the summer. Most of the people in PA will be coming back to AC then as PA doesn't have the boardwalk and the beach. Also let's be honest, does the average ploppy even understand how much AC's terrible rules affect them?? The average ploppy doesn't even understand the very basic concept of variance. Otherwise, you'd never see anyone trying to play BJ at a normal table for only $100.

After they lose the $100, they will automatically think BJ sucks, I don't want to play it anymore and will go hop on over to the slot machines where they feel their money will last despite it only hurting them even more in the long run.

This is why the $1 BJ games with the .25 ante are so popular now. Ploppies don't care about odds or even understand them. They care about fun.

I wish I could do a poll of all PA non-counters who used to play in AC and see what % play in PA strictly because the rules are better. I'm going to guess it's less than .22% (House EV of H17 rule) of respondents.

If it's more than .22% that would be strong evidence that AC is shooting themselves in the foot.

 

[Gamblor]

The slightly crappier rules in AC doesn't dramatically average ploppy. But this, in conjunction with a billion other things that place does to try to nickel and dime the customer certainly does add up. And this all stems from the same bean counter mentality.

Hmm thought the weather was pretty crappy this weekend? Thought it might keep people away, least it was for me a bit further up north.

 

[21forme]

AC doesn't have to worry about PA during the summer. Most of the people in PA will be coming back to AC then as PA doesn't have the boardwalk and the beach. Also let's be honest, does the average ploppy even understand how much AC's terrible rules affect them??

As is the case in Vegas, ploppies come with a fixed amount they expect to lose. In the past, the money may have lasted 4 days. Now it lasts 2 days due to the crappy rules on the Strip. Same in AC, to a degree, though variance will be higher because play time is shorter.

So, the crappy rules discourage repeat business, which is very important for AC in the summer - weekend beach crowd, weekday multi-day vacation, etc. AC needs to pray for a hotter, more humid summer than normal, to get people to the beach.

 

[The Chaperone]

As is the case in Vegas, ploppies come with a fixed amount they expect to lose. In the past, the money may have lasted 4 days. Now it lasts 2 days due to the crappy rules on the Strip. Same in AC, to a degree, though variance will be higher because play time is shorter.

So, the crappy rules discourage repeat business, which is very important for AC in the summer - weekend beach crowd, weekday multi-day vacation, etc. AC needs to pray for a hotter, more humid summer than normal, to get people to the beach.

Ploppies don't understand math, but they understand getting their ass handed to them every single trip. Back in the day, a ploppy could play good rules single deck on the Vegas strip, and if they had any clue about BS, they might win 4 out of 10 times. Now they play 6:5 SD and will be lucky to win 1 out of 10 times. Ploppies can lose a little and have fun, but not even having a chance isn't fun even to a ploppy. Obviously the casinos/bean counters are fairly hell bent on throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don't expect anything to change. At some point, they might realize where they screwed up. Like when they no longer have customers.

 

[Ferretnparrot]

They are certainly short on gamblers, as compared to times in the past.

I think a lower house edge is actually the right move, it would allow people to play longer before they lost their money, and ultimately, they would be more likely to enjoy their "experience" and return, or bring freinds etc.

They could be catoring to another market with the one dollar bj games, but they are still shooting themselves in the foot with the 10 dollar max rule. half the time i walk by these tables everybody is just betting ten dollars. They all would be betting more, but they arnt because they arnt allowed to.

 

[Gamblor]

They could be catoring to another market with the one dollar bj games, but they are still shooting themselves in the foot with the 10 dollar max rule. half the time i walk by these tables everybody is just betting ten dollars. They all would be betting more, but they arnt because they arnt allowed to.

Another great CC countermeasure that costs them money. Casino mgmt. likes to burn down the barn to get rid of us rats.

Played at a table with $10-$200 limit, never seen that before at this place, it's usually $10-$500. Probably got spooked earlier that day. Well guess what, a couple of bigger betting ploppies wanted to bet $500, but couldn't :laugh:

 

[21forme]

Another great CC countermeasure that costs them money. Casino mgmt. likes to burn down the barn to get rid of us rats.

Played at a table with $10-$200 limit, never seen that before at this place, it's usually $10-$500. Probably got spooked earlier that day. Well guess what, a couple of bigger betting ploppies wanted to bet $500, but couldn't :laugh:

Here's another classic:
I was playing Sp21 in AC, count was + and I had 2x100 out. Table was full. Ploppy asked for one of my spots. I said no. She called PB over and he said I must give up one of my spots. What do you think she bet? Yup, table min ($10).

 

[bigplayer]

This last weekend the boardwalk was bustling with activity and the number of people in the casinos was seemingly more than it's been in a long while with the warmer weather. Is there hope that AC will get it's share or a more reasonable share of visitors due to the beach and boardwalk this summer even though so much competition has opened up in neighboring states or does this mean more beachgoers than gamblers?

For blackjack players, Pennsylvania rules are better and AC is still pushing the same old crappy Hit 17, 6to5, etc. a la Harrah's origin out there that will quickly clean them out and send them looking to play elsewhere... permanently. Will AC try to be competitive or will they cling onto the extra little gouge they make for dear life even if it means losing business and putting the building blocks in place for financial suicide? Only time will tell but with summer kicking in and the tourists starting to pack in the boardwalk, it might be time to think about keeping AC competitive and to hope that the boardwalk and beach serve as added incentive to retain business.

Most AC casinos offer s17 das standard shoe games at $25 and up. Some don't offer these rules until $100 min and up and they are stupid. If it were my casino I'd only have bad rules on shoes with $10 or lower limits (hell I wouldn't have any games lower than $10 min as you cannot justify paying the costs of the dealer at lower than $10 min unless you had either an ante or 6/5 payoff). Inflation has done away with the viability of $5 full-pay blackjack.

 

[WRX]

Most AC casinos offer s17 das standard shoe games at $25 and up. Some don't offer these rules until $100 min and up and they are stupid. If it were my casino I'd only have bad rules on shoes with $10 or lower limits (hell I wouldn't have any games lower than $10 min as you cannot justify paying the costs of the dealer at lower than $10 min unless you had either an ante or 6/5 payoff). Inflation has done away with the viability of $5 full-pay blackjack.

Oh, great, this is all we need, bigplayer giving good advice to casinos.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Most AC casinos offer s17 das standard shoe games at $25 and up. Some don't offer these rules until $100 min and up and they are stupid. If it were my casino I'd only have bad rules on shoes with $10 or lower limits (hell I wouldn't have any games lower than $10 min as you cannot justify paying the costs of the dealer at lower than $10 min unless you had either an ante or 6/5 payoff). Inflation has done away with the viability of $5 full-pay blackjack.

Funny, there is A LOT of $5 full pay blackjack in my state.

 

[FLASH1296]

A major issue in the Casino industry is how heavily the state taxes the casinos.

This is an issue for the players as high tax rates create a huge "nut" of overhead.

In states like Nevada the tax rate is in the single digits allowing the casinos to offer good games.

In some states, e.g. Illinois, tax rates run around 16%, preventing good games from being offered. Neighboring Indiana has about ½ the tax rate, ergo Indiana has better games.

 

[21forme]

In states like Nevada the tax rate is in the single digits allowing the casinos to offer good games.

You neglected to add, "but their greed, mismanagement, and shortsightedness is getting the best of them..."

 

[StudiodeKadent]

Tax rates are only one factor. However, they do massively increase overhead and thus tend to encourage a small number of big casinos rather than a larger number of smaller casinos. However this is a very general tendency and there are obviously other factors.

Flash may be overstating the effect that a tax rate cut will have, but ceteris paribus I agree that a reduction of a tax rate will increase the probability of a casino lowering their house margin.

Still, simply cutting the tax rate won't necessarily work. For one, Macau's tax rate is huge and the blackjack house edge is 0.1% (its uncountable but that edge is very low). Of course, there are other factors since Blackjack is rarely played and most people there play Baccarat and the players are far less rational than American gamblers.

Honestly, I don't think that the political route would fix things (PA has fantastic rules but the casinos are already asking for the ability to H17 and pay 6:5, and gambling is a highly regulated industry with large tendencies towards resultant corporatism and consolidation). If you want to make better blackjack conditions, what you need is a more educated (about blackjack) customer base.

And this is a hard thing to do.

AC's huge operating costs and tough regulation (although they recently eased that) does mean AC is perpetually more likely to have tougher games, and they also have (apparently) more strategy players which means their profit margins are lower (this is the downside of an educated player base).

I think if we want to have better rules, the following conditions would help;

1) Simpler regulation that focuses on the vitals; keeping games honest and transparent, with reasonable and modest taxation.

2) Easy entry and exit to and from the market (tied in with point 1).

3) A player base that's sufficiently educated about blackjack to differentiate good from bad games.

4) Advantage play kept to relatively low levels. Casinos need to be able to flat-bet counters and yes, lower penetration. Certainly I think heat is justified in high limit rooms and on high level bettors.

Point 3 is one we can work on advancing.

 

[aslan]

Ploppies don't understand math, but they understand getting their ass handed to them every single trip. Back in the day, a ploppy could play good rules single deck on the Vegas strip, and if they had any clue about BS, they might win 4 out of 10 times. Now they play 6:5 SD and will be lucky to win 1 out of 10 times. Ploppies can lose a little and have fun, but not even having a chance isn't fun even to a ploppy. Obviously the casinos/bean counters are fairly hell bent on throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don't expect anything to change. At some point, they might realize where they screwed up. Like when they no longer have customers.

But don't forget what Barnum said: "There's a sucker born every minute." They won't ever dry up completely. They are multiplying too fast. You might say it's and ever increasing ploppulation. :grin::laugh::whip:

 

[tthree]

Tax rates are only one factor. However, they do massively increase overhead and thus tend to encourage a small number of big casinos rather than a larger number of smaller casinos. However this is a very general tendency and there are obviously other factors.

Flash may be overstating the effect that a tax rate cut will have, but ceteris paribus I agree that a reduction of a tax rate will increase the probability of a casino lowering their house margin.

Still, simply cutting the tax rate won't necessarily work. For one, Macau's tax rate is huge and the blackjack house edge is 0.1% (its uncountable but that edge is very low). Of course, there are other factors since Blackjack is rarely played and most people there play Baccarat and the players are far less rational than American gamblers.

Honestly, I don't think that the political route would fix things (PA has fantastic rules but the casinos are already asking for the ability to H17 and pay 6:5, and gambling is a highly regulated industry with large tendencies towards resultant corporatism and consolidation). If you want to make better blackjack conditions, what you need is a more educated (about blackjack) customer base.

And this is a hard thing to do.

AC's huge operating costs and tough regulation (although they recently eased that) does mean AC is perpetually more likely to have tougher games, and they also have (apparently) more strategy players which means their profit margins are lower (this is the downside of an educated player base).

I think if we want to have better rules, the following conditions would help;

1) Simpler regulation that focuses on the vitals; keeping games honest and transparent, with reasonable and modest taxation.

2) Easy entry and exit to and from the market (tied in with point 1).

3) A player base that's sufficiently educated about blackjack to differentiate good from bad games.

4) Advantage play kept to relatively low levels. Casinos need to be able to flat-bet counters and yes, lower penetration. Certainly I think heat is justified in high limit rooms and on high level bettors.

Point 3 is one we can work on advancing.

Cutting tax rates on corporations doesnt affect the consumer like raising them. Cutting them allows the corporation to pocket the difference. Raising tax rates always comes out of the consumers pockets. The corporation either cuts the pay, benefits, and/or the number of employees or they pass the increased cost onto the consumer in order to pay for the higher taxes. No matter how you slice it increased corporate tax rates comes out of the peoples pockets who can least afford it. It either squeezes the influences that would help the economy grow like higher wages, better benefits or higher employment or it comes directly from the consumer. Most of the time it is a mixture of all of these.