Hosts shooting themselves in foot at certain CET property

I won't name the property yet, but I'll tell you the story.

Background: I am a Seven Stars player, but an "overcomped" player, meaning that I've used more benefits than I've "earned" with my play. I also do my play in a concentrated few-month fashion, and then shut down and don't play at all for a long time, despite staying for free in the properties with my Seven Stars benefits. However, on my last CET stay, I earned 37,500 tiers at Harrah's New Orleans in just 3 days, and this was only a month ago. So while I do have a history of a lot of "no play" stays, my last stay indeed had some nice play.

I called this particular property (NOT in Vegas), and asked for a host. I have not been to this particular property for at least 8 years. I wanted to stay from March 10-14, with the following plans regarding play:

March 10: Play 5,000 base tier credits of VP ($50,000 coin-in), stay overnight
March 11: Play 5,000 base tier credits of VP ($50,000 coin-in), stay overnight
March 12: Play 5,000 base tier credits of VP ($50,000 coin-in), stay overnight
March 13: Play 5,000 base tier credits of VP ($50,000 coin-in), stay overnight
March 14: Play 5,000 base tier credits of VP ($50,000 coin-in), leave after done playing in late afternoon

So basically I was looking to stay 4 nights, but actually play 5 days, with the 5th day not even using up a room for the night.

Recall that the standard Seven Stars benefit gives me a minimum of 4 free nights anyway.

This was not on any offer or promo, meaning that the only cost I would be incurring them would be the room. I have a ton of RCs, so they won't even be giving me any discretionary comps.

They will be getting $250,000 VP coin-in out of me from the whole thing, which is a great situation for them.

Are they salivating over this situation?

No.

Just the opposite. They are making it incredibly difficult.

My only request was that they let me check out very late on the 14th (something like 6pm), so I can finish my play without stressing over checkout time. They said that this cannot be done!

I then asked what the problem was. They said that I could not be given a checkout of later than 2pm, no matter what.

I reasoned, "Yeah, but if I'm actually playing your high limit machines, and that's the reason I can't check out -- even after 4 days of heavy play as well -- you STILL are going to make me get out of the room by 2:00?"

"Yes, but you can have your stuff moved to the bell desk," I was told.

Unbelievable.

So then I asked about getting a 5th night comped so I will just check out "early" instead of late.

Nope.

Supposedly, with my play history, they can only give me 3 complimentary nights, and in fact I can't even be guaranteed a 4th one. This already contradicts the standard Seven Stars benefit. A 5th one will also have to be evaluated by play "on the back end", meaning I'm throwing myself at their mercy whether I pay for the 4th and 5th nights, even with $250,000 coin-in.

I asked, "Okay, I understand you need to actually see my play occur before giving me anything, but can you at least promise that if I play the $250,000 coin-in like I said I would, you will give me the 4th and 5th nights?"

"No. I'm not going to talk numbers with you," he shot back. "You can book your 3 comp nights with us, we can evaluate your play, and then we can see what we can do about wiping off the $96+tax for the 4th and 5th nights based upon what you play. But we will make no promises or discussions about this until your play is over."

As one last attempt, I replied, "Look, I understand that you don't want to promise me 5 nights based upon my claim I'm going to play, and then if I don't, you end up looking bad. But I'm not asking for guarantees right now. I only want a contingent guarantee, meaning that if I live up to my end of playing this amount, you will promise me that I won't have to pay for the 4th and 5th nights."

"I'm not going to be able to make that promise. As I said, play first, then we will talk."

FAIL

So then I interrupted him and said, "Wait, I know the CCS (800 number) will book 4 or 5 nights without any promises of play, simply because I'm Seven Stars. So why are you only giving me 3?"

"You're right, the CCS might," he said. "They have a different block of rooms. You should call them and try."

So that's what I did. I called the CCS, and they effortlessly gave me 5 nights comp, with no promises of play. And now no host is going to get commission for it, whereas this guy would have gotten a nice commission if he had just booked those same 5 comp nights.

So, to review:

- Host would not promise me a comp 4th and 5th night, even if we hinge that promise upon $250,000 of VP coin-in.

- Host would not go for 4 nights and a late checkout on the last day, even if the reason for my late checkout is that I'm playing their high limit VP machines! I was told to have the bell desk hold my stuff instead.

- Despite these obnoxiously strict and intractable policies, the CCS (800 number) was willing to book those same 5 nights complimentary, without question. And the host knew this was likely the case.


So here I was basically telling them that I was going to show up and hand them a boatload of high limit play, and was only asking for those free hotel nights if I really lived up to that promise, and they still refused. Now that host gets nothing, and in fact he even admitted to me (after I brought it up) that I was probably better off booking with the CCS instead of him.

Pretty amazing.

In before Alan chides me with, "Dan, that's what you get for being a comp whore."

But now you see why I usually like to avoid hosts.

Dan you have several options:

1. On your last day ask a host to review your play and then ask for another comped night.

2. Use your RCs to pay for the extra night if they won't comp you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan you have several options:

1. On your last day ask a host to review your play and then ask for another comped night.

2. Use your RCs to pay for the extra night if they won't comp you.

---

3. Call the CCS and ask them to book 5 nights, which they did

I mentioned that in the original post, but I guess you missed it.

Anyway, I find it incredibly weak that they weren't able to guarantee 5 nights comped in exchange for $250k coin-in, especially when the CCS will do it with $0 coin-in.

This wasn't even a high-end property. I was asking for a room that costs $140/night on the open market.

They should have been kissing my feet trying to get me to play $250k coin-in in 4 days, rather than trying to throw up hurdles and refusing to guarantee the 4th and 5th nights free if I meet that amount of play.

The answer should have been either, "Sure, since the CCS will do 5 nights at this property for those exact dates, I can, too" or "I can't give you those other two nights right now, but I guarantee I will comp it if you run anywhere near that amount of play."

Or for that 5th day, "Yeah, sure, if you're sitting at our high limit machines, feel free to leave your stuff in your room as long as you want, and then check out when you're finished that afternoon/evening."

The host wanted me to play first and let him evaluate it after-the-fact, rather than just leveling with me as to whether or not $250k of coin-in would be enough to qualify for those two extra nights. (It obviously was, but he was either hindered by smothering rules or just being a jerk.)

The fact that they thought it was reasonable to tell me to interrupt my play on that last day and move my stuff down to the bellman is a huge slap in the face to someone who wants to give them business. I'm asking for a few extra hours with the room WHILE I PLAY THEIR HIGH LIMIT MACHINES. It's not like I'm demanding a $1000 meal for me and my friends.

The host (who was an executive host) seemed to imply that he lacked the power to give me that conditional-on-play-guarantee in advance, and that I would have to talk to his boss on Tuesday.

Instead, I just called the CCS and it's all booked.

This is one schizophrenic company. There should never be a situation where an executive host has less power or willingness to help than the national 800 number. It's not even like I was pulling a fast one on the CCS, as the host conceded when I brought it up that the CCS could probably do more for me than he could.

Dumb.

Dan, I can't explain why the host said no. But why didn't you just go there -- play -- and then ask for the extra night on your last day? That's what I would do especially at a new property where I have no experience.

There is also the possibility that the host has access to some note on your player profile that shows how little you played in 2014 (zero), and you don't know if there are some negative comments in your profile that "non hosts" would not see.

There is also the possibility that you just got lucky with the regular reservation system. But a word of caution:

Recently my son made a reservation for Caesars with the regular reservation system and NOT with his host. He said he didn't want to bother his host. Well, when he got to Caesars to check in he got a surprise -- the reservation was at Paris. And since he arrived at about 2am when a host was not available, he had to move over to Paris.

Dan I went back and read your original post. Hosts might indeed have different and better rooms to assign. That's not to say you will be unhappy but what the host said does make sense.

Ugh, I typed a response and it got killed when I hit the wrong button. Time to try again....

Alan, first off, I think your son's bad experience with the CCS was just a mistake on their part. I had it happen once, too. I was supposed to stay at Caesars and they booked the Rio accidentally. But I caught it many days before the trip, so it was fixed. Other than that, I've never had an issue with a CCS reservation, and since then I triple-check the booking at the time to make sure it's correct. I doubt the reservation just morphed to Paris on its own. (I'm not saying it was your son's fault, but that he probably didn't check their work.)

Regarding my situation, you are probably correct that the host saw my zero-play in 2014 and got suspicious of my promise to play a lot. That's fine, and understandable. I don't blame him for that. Where I do blame him was not making a CONTINGENT promise to me -- basically that I'd get the free room for sure if I played a lot. Instead, he laid some BS on me like, "I can't tell you whether we can comp it or not, and I won't talk numbers with you. Just play and bring it to me at the end, and we will see what we can do."

That's a load of crap. Just be honest with me and tell me what play you're expecting, and I'll make sure I do that much. He wasn't risking anything by making a contingent promise, and in fact would have put himself in line for some nice commission.

I didn't get lucky with the CCS. The host didn't suggest the CCS to me (he wanted me just to book 3 nights and book a rate for the other 2, and be at their mercy), but when I brought up the CCS on my own, he admitted that it was likely that they could probably do 5 nights comped for me. "It's a different block of rooms," he said.

But was he telling the truth about the different block of rooms?

For the most part, yes. And that's part of the dysfunction that is CET. Hosts are forced to "justify" the comps they give (even comp rooms). So basically they look you up, and if it gives them a rate for the nights you want, they need to comp it off, and they grumble doing that for Seven Stars who haven't been playing, because they HAVE to do it, yet it counts against their numbers if the person doesn't play. I'm not sure why he would only do 3, as they're supposed to always do 4 as per Seven Stars rules, but a host will never do 5 for a player like me, whereas the CCS can always do 5 (at least in all of my experiences across many properties).

Why can the CCS do 5? Well, they don't have access to your play, so they get more of a blanket authorization to help all Seven Stars. So to the CCS, I look the same as a guy with 3 million tier points.

You are correct that the CCS has less of a choice regarding room types, but that's also property-dependent. The CCS can book me in the Augustus Tower at Caesars, but they can only book me for a "standard room" at some other properties. And indeed, they do have a different block of rooms they're drawing from, so sometimes the CCS shows "sold out" when there are plenty of rooms still available. CCS supervisors can override this, though, and draw from the pool of rooms used by hosts.

Anyway, the dysfunction here occurred two ways:

1) When a player calls up and expresses the desire to put in $250k in VP coin-in in 4 days, a host should fall all over himself to get it done, and even if he's skeptical of the promise, at the very least tie what the player is asking for to a minimum amount of play. I've had that done before, even back in the '90s. Like I would call a host at TI and say, "I'd like a free room" and she would say, "Okay, I can do it if you average 3 hours of blackjack each day at $25 average bet", and I would say, "Okay, no problem" and play that much. Telling the high roller, "Play first and we will see about comping your room" is a slap in the face.

2) The host should never have less power to comp than the CCS. I have seen this at other properties, as well, including ones in Vegas. If the CCS will do it, the host should also do it. Rather than saying, "Hang up and call the CCS, and maybe they'll do it for you", the host should say, "Since the CCS will do it anyway, I'll just comp these..."

I think the problem here is that the host gets dinged and/or loses commission when a Seven Stars books using their benefit and then doesn't play, whereas the CCS reps do not. So the CCS is happy to do whatever is within their power to do (usually give you 5 nights free), while the hosts are constantly paranoid that you will not play and hurt their overall numbers. It's a bad system.

I should add that this isn't a problem at MGM, or anywhere else, because CET is the only rewards program I know of which guarantees free rooms to their highest tier level.

Everywhere else, your room comps are dictated by your recent play.

At CET, there is a dueling system where part of it wants the no-recent-play Seven Stars to pay a rate, but at the same time the Seven Stars member is entitled to it free. So this leaves the hosts on the hook to issue comps that they otherwise don't want to give, and the CCS is granted power to override all of those rates without consequence if the customer doesn't play at all.

I wish I just called the CCS first and avoided all of this hassle, but I had these visions that they would give me a suite because I was visiting during an off-time, am Seven Stars, and just played a lot at New Orleans. Instead, I got the run-around.

Dan it is difficult to know if you are getting a fair shake or not. After all you squeak by into 7 Stars and you had zero play in 2014 plus you admit you've been overcomped. You are unique.

I think you are lucky getting whatever you get based on how you milk the system.

I don't blame any host for giving you an argument because you are a high risk client who might be all talk. After all you did have zero play in 2014 and used a lot of benefits.

Sorry. You'll have to find another shoulder to cry on. I'm out.

I am with Dan on this one. As I have stated several times here, I never ask for anything--it just is not my style. My deal with my hosts was always I need a suite and my meals and maybe a show and an extra room on occasion. If I deviate from my usual play then tell me and adjust next time. But I always went in knowing that my standard play would allow for what I needed. There was no risk. There were no surprises. That is why I can't deal with the present system and have phased out my Vegas trips. I won't use up my points and ask for additional comps--I just can't operate that way and I don't want to worry about it or get upset by some new young host who doesn't understand the gambler mentality.
Dan does not want to deal with the risk and rightfully so. If he plays that amount he should be guaranteed the comps. No ifs ands or buts, regardless of whether he is previously over-comped.

I can see both sides of this story. If the marketing department gave him the 5 comped nights without question it's kinda stupid a host won't do the same. They work for the same company and they take care of customers with the same loyalty program to work with. I can understand a host being careful about what he wants to comp upfront knowing Dan didn't play during 2014 and was overcomped. But at the same time, I don't see why the host couldn't just have said he would comp the 5th night if his actual loss was amount X (or based on theo). This host obviously didn't want to "flex" much knowing Dan is a VP player (with a house edge of about 0,5%) who didn't play at all in 2014. If he would have been a slot player giving 250,000 dollars coin-in in 4 days, I doubt there would have been a problem.

This is much ado about nothing. The host gave him three nights and said he wanted to see his play after that comped period. What's the big deal?

Okay ... Dan got more out of another department but I am sure the host was doing his job.

Regnis you're a player. Nuff said.

True! His host said he wanted to evaluate his play first. But at the same time if the host was willing to comp him the additional nights IF Dan showed the amount of play he said he was going to give him why not tell Dan upfront he would? Or the host should have just said "look buddy, you have to build a new track record first before I am willing to comp you more upfront. That's the way it is, I'm not going to do more than this at this moment. It's my responsibility at this point and I'm not responsible for what the marketing department is willing to give you"

I think your statement about Regnis is correct. Those who are real players are not out there to milk the system (by definition). They expect to get comped according to their play and know they will receive their usual level of comps without sweating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

This is much ado about nothing. The host gave him three nights and said he wanted to see his play after that comped period. What's the big deal?

Okay ... Dan got more out of another department but I am sure the host was doing his job.

Regnis you're a player. Nuff said.

---

Alan-when I was young and new to Vegas, and maybe a little intimidated by the whole host thing, people were telling me I should be getting way more comps. I didn't actually have a host--I just dealt with the floor men who, while I was at the craps table, would come over and offer dinner etc. So finally I pulled one of them aside and told him that people were telling me I should be getting more comps. He said all you got to do is ask--we'll give you whatever you want. I said I don't like to ask for anything--I just want what I'm entitled to. He sent me to a host to whom I said the same thing and it was good for 25 or 30 years until the hosts all got castrated at caesars and the reward points took over. But the key was I don't want to ask and I don't want surprises, and while Dan may have other issues, the type of play he was going to give them should have gotten him the room, contingent on actual play as described. He shouldn't have to play that much and still wonder if they will pick up the extra 2 nights. He didn't trust them and rightfully so.

According to Dan's original posr the host clearly said he would evaluate Dan's play to see about comping the fourth and fifth nights. Please re-read the post.

What more should a player who claims to be overcomped and didn't play at all in 2014 want?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

What more should a player who claims to be overcomped and didn't play at all in 2014 want?

---

I really do think the host should have been willing to offer a conditional agreement to comp the extra nights if Dan played at the level he said he would. If, because of prior overcomping, the host was unsure if the numbers would work out even given that play, I think he should have proactively suggested contacting the marketing folks to book his stay as a 7* benefit. It would have been less rude, in my opinion, to just tell him outright that even a lot of play might not tip the scales far enough to justify a local comp, and steer him towards a national marketing booking.

LMFAO @ Dan Druff making a dupe account to corroborate his OWN thoughts on the subject. #SOOBVIOUS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

This is much ado about nothing. The host gave him three nights and said he wanted to see his play after that comped period. What's the big deal?

Okay ... Dan got more out of another department but I am sure the host was doing his job.

Regnis you're a player. Nuff said.

---

Alan, you are correct in that the host was likely doing what he was instructed. However, you are incorrect that I should be okay with this ridiculous situation.

After going back and forth about this for about 5-10 minutes, he cut me off and said, "You know, I think your request is something that I won't be able to help you with. You'll need to escalate this to my boss, who will be in Tuesday. I'll give him the message for you..."

I then cut him off and said that I would try the CCS first, and call his boss on Tuesday if the CCS isn't able to help me. He agreed that was probably the best plan (though, again, I had to be the one to suggest it).

It sounded to me like he had the directive from above not to ever let the player know how much he has to play in order to get a certain amount of comps, even if it's something as silly as a room during an otherwise dead period at the hotel (and believe me, they are going to be fairly empty on these dates).

He didn't tell me he had that directive, but he was being really stubborn and was trying to browbeat me into just accepting his answer of, "Play first, we will discuss comps after". When it became clear I wasn't going for it, he then said I needed to talk to his boss, which seems to indicate that we hit a wall regarding what he was allowed to do.

I have a feeling this directive probably came with the foolish and customer-hostile assumption that you can't tell players what they need to play in order to earn comps, or otherwise they will play that amount and stop. If you leave them wondering, they will probably over-play just to make sure they "earn" what they want/need. The problem is that players get angry when they are trying to get an idea how what they can expect in return for heavy play. In my case, I wanted just a hotel room, and the same hotel room I was able to get through my standard Seven Stars benefit through their national call center. That's why this was so ridiculous.

Alan, you keep asking why I don't just play and then talk to the guy after that. The reason is that I have seen some hosts take the attitude that my previous overcomping carries forward to the present. So if I'm overcomped by $2000 (just making up numbers here), and then I only generate $300 in comps with my current play, he could say I am still $1700 in the red, and will get nothing. As I said before, I once had a host try to pull this crap on me about 2 years ago, and it took a lot of arguing for them to back down on it.

If overcomped status carries forward and precludes me from earning hotel stays despite heavy play at a new property, then they need to be honest and tell me. If that's the case, I'll look for another property where they don't have this policy. I shouldn't be told to play and then get the bad news later, after the host gets his nice commission from my action. I need to know up front generally what I can expect. I am not asking for special treatment, but I also don't want to be popped with unpleasant surprises.

I'm not sure that's what would have happened at this property, but I wasn't going to take that chance.

And as everyone else in this thread is saying, it's especially ridiculous that the CCS was able to comp me 5 nights with ZERO promises/expectation of play, while this host couldn't/wouldn't. Departments at CET should be in sync to where the hosts can, at minimum, offer a player the identical deal that the national call center can.

Honestly, this is more a symptom of the chaos/dysfunction existing at CET/Total Rewards than anything else. I know it's not personal towards me. The hosts are still operating on the old model where players have to earn their comps, and yet the national call center and marketing departments are operating on the new model, using RCs and guaranteed tier level benefits. These two often don't mesh properly, which leads to a lot of contradictions and frustrations on both the parts of the hosts and players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by synergistic

I really do think the host should have been willing to offer a conditional agreement to comp the extra nights if Dan played at the level he said he would. If, because of prior overcomping, the host was unsure if the numbers would work out even given that play, I think he should have proactively suggested contacting the marketing folks to book his stay as a 7* benefit. It would have been less rude, in my opinion, to just tell him outright that even a lot of play might not tip the scales far enough to justify a local comp, and steer him towards a national marketing booking.

---

Very well said. Can't argue with any of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by synergistic

I really do think the host should have been willing to offer a conditional agreement to comp the extra nights if Dan played at the level he said he would. If, because of prior overcomping, the host was unsure if the numbers would work out even given that play, I think he should have proactively suggested contacting the marketing folks to book his stay as a 7* benefit. It would have been less rude, in my opinion, to just tell him outright that even a lot of play might not tip the scales far enough to justify a local comp, and steer him towards a national marketing booking.

---

Based on Dan's original post, it appears to me there WAS a conditional agreement:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

"No. I'm not going to talk numbers with you," he shot back. "You can book your 3 comp nights with us, we can evaluate your play, and then we can see what we can do about wiping off the $96+tax for the 4th and 5th nights based upon what you play. But we will make no promises or discussions about this until your play is over."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Alan, you keep asking why I don't just play and then talk to the guy after that. The reason is that I have seen some hosts take the attitude that my previous overcomping carries forward to the present. So if I'm overcomped by $2000 (just making up numbers here), and then I only generate $300 in comps with my current play, he could say I am still $1700 in the red, and will get nothing. As I said before, I once had a host try to pull this crap on me about 2 years ago, and it took a lot of arguing for them to back down on it.

---

So... you haven't played at all in 2014, have no history at this particular casino, admit to already being overcomped, and now you feel that you are entitled to guarantees based on your history? Come on Dan, get real.

And as far as the host not going out on a limb but some other department could... the host realizes his job is on the line and he has orders to follow. Some phone operator doesn't see your history in the computer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Based on Dan's original post, it appears to me there WAS a conditional agreement:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

"No. I'm not going to talk numbers with you," he shot back. "You can book your 3 comp nights with us, we can evaluate your play, and then we can see what we can do about wiping off the $96+tax for the 4th and 5th nights based upon what you play. But we will make no promises or discussions about this until your play is over."

---

That's not a conditional agreement. He said he would make no promises or discuss anything until he saw my play. How is that conditional? He's telling me I will have no idea what he is or isn't comping me until AFTER I play, which is crap.

Before you say, "Yeah, but he's comping you 3 nights", keep in mind that the Seven Stars program guarantees me 4 free nights, so he's not doing me any favors. In fact, he's violating Seven Stars policy by only giving me 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

So... you haven't played at all in 2014, have no history at this particular casino, admit to already being overcomped, and now you feel that you are entitled to guarantees based on your history? Come on Dan, get real.

And as far as the host not going out on a limb but some other department could... the host realizes his job is on the line and he has orders to follow. Some phone operator doesn't see your history in the computer.

---

I wasn't looking for guarantees.

I was looking for a CONDITIONAL guarantee, meaning that he would promise to give me the free 4th and 5th night ONLY IF I ACTUALLY PLAYED WHAT I PROMISED I WOULD.

Why do you think that's unreasonable?

Where is the host's risk in this situation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Where is the host's risk in this situation?

---

His job maybe?

Look at it this way, Dan. You got your five nights with no need to gamble the way you told the host you would. You shouldn't be complaining. You should be thankful you got your way... again.

And for all of you wondering....The property in question is Lake Tahoe. #freeliftticketsplz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kerry W.

And for all of you wondering....The property in question is Lake Tahoe. #freeliftticketsplz.

---

You must listen to my radio show.

Free lift tickets won't help me though, because I injured my ankle last week, and it's not getting better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kerry W.

LMFAO @ Dan Druff making a dupe account to corroborate his OWN thoughts on the subject. #SOOBVIOUS.

---

Why did you edit your post which previously said you agreed with synergistic?

I don't have any dupes here. Alan can verify IPs are different.

Oh it looks like Kerry W is a banned user here under a new account.

Remember Dante? He's back.

Ironic that he's accusing ME of using dupes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

His job maybe?

Look at it this way, Dan. You got your five nights with no need to gamble the way you told the host you would. You shouldn't be complaining. You should be thankful you got your way... again.

---

I got my way only because I knew enough about the system not to accept the answer given to me by the host.

The typical player in my spot (say, someone overcomped but who legitimately wants to start playing actively again) will be turned off by this and probably go somewhere else.

And that's what I mean by shooting themselves in the foot.

How would the guy lose his job?

If I really play the 250k coin-in, he would look good to his bosses for bringing me in.

If I don't play the 250k coin-in, he wouldn't give me those nights and wouldn't be at risk for any trouble.

And if the 250k coin-in is somehow not enough for those two nights, he should tell me up front, rather than mislead me with, "Play first, come back to me when it's done."

I'm just saying this is a lousy system, and is likely driving customers away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

The typical player in my spot (say, someone overcomped but who legitimately wants to start playing actively again) will be turned off by this and probably go somewhere else.

And that's what I mean by shooting themselves in the foot.

How would the guy lose his job?

If I really play the 250k coin-in, he would look good to his bosses for bringing me in.

---

Dan,

I don't see this as a situation of any host shooting himself in the foot. At worst it is simply an inconsistency in the CET system - but we have all seen many occasions of that. In the current case there are two sources of free rooms for you, the CCS system and the host.

You got the five nights as a Seven Stars through CCS. But presumably because you played no action in 2014, the host has been warned that you are radioactive and so is not interested in even negotiating with you. If you are correct that you are so overcomped that you are in a big hole that you need to fill with theorectical losses before you even get back to even, then why are you so confident that the host will even get anything other than written up even if you do put in 250,000 in action? He might not get any credit until CET gets back all the comp value you were given and that might mean much more than the action you are offering on a full play machine.

I am not criticizing you for playing the game with CET, but lets not pretend that the host is not looking out for his own self interest just like you are for your own.

BTW, I was in Lake Tahoe myself a couple of weeks ago and the full pay JOB was still there.

FAB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FABismonte

Dan,

I don't see this as a situation of any host shooting himself in the foot. At worst it is simply an inconsistency in the CET system - but we have all seen many occasions of that. In the current case there are two sources of free rooms for you, the CCS system and the host.

You got the five nights as a Seven Stars through CCS. But presumably because you played no action in 2014, the host has been warned that you are radioactive and so is not interested in even negotiating with you. If you are correct that you are so overcomped that you are in a big hole that you need to fill with theorectical losses before you even get back to even, then why are you so confident that the host will even get anything other than written up even if you do put in 250,000 in action? He might not get any credit until CET gets back all the comp value you were given and that might mean much more than the action you are offering on a full play machine.

I am not criticizing you for playing the game with CET, but lets not pretend that the host is not looking out for his own self interest just like you are for your own.

BTW, I was in Lake Tahoe myself a couple of weeks ago and the full pay JOB was still there.

FAB

---

Thanks for the info about the full pay JOB. I actually called yesterday and had a long conversation with the slot manager to make sure it was! Otherwise that's a loooooooong drive for nothing (especially since I can't ski right now with my ankle injury).

Regarding the host, I just wish he would be honest with me, if it really is the case that I'm in a huge hole with my comps and 250k of coin-in won't even qualify for a free room at this point. It's pretty sleazy to say "Play, and then we will talk about it" if he knows in advance that I'll get nothing even if I really do play what I'm promising.

I'm not saying that he was doing this. Perhaps he just has a thing about never giving the player any info about what they're "playing for" comp-wise, but in this case it just wasn't handled right. Either make the conditional promise, or level with me and tell me that my planned play isn't going to make it.

This kind of looked to me like one of those things where he wanted the commission from my play, while giving himself the freedom to comp me nothing for it.

I don't think there are any warnings in the system about me, but rather I probably have such a bad overcomp situation that, as you put it, I am considered radioactive for hosts to touch. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

The typical player in my spot

---

Dan there is definitely NOT a typical player in your spot. You are unique. If there were another 7 Stars player who wanted to book a 5 night stay at a casino where he hadn't played before he would probably call HIS host at his HOME CASINO to book it and not even bother calling the other property.

Dan,

Too bad about your ankle as you could get Seven Stars complimentary lift tickets at Heavenly. If you are not skiing, then I would suggest that you consider soaking your ankle in the indoor pool or Jacuzzi. Then maybe taking a drink in the Harvey's scenic diamond lounge using the "golden door" elevator. Just don't forget to slip a buck to the old lady operating the elevator. Good luck.

FAB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FABismonte

Dan,

Too bad about your ankle as you could get Seven Stars complimentary lift tickets at Heavenly. If you are not skiing, then I would suggest that you consider soaking your ankle in the indoor pool or Jacuzzi. Then maybe taking a drink in the Harvey's scenic diamond lounge using the "golden door" elevator. Just don't forget to slip a buck to the old lady operating the elevator. Good luck.

FAB

---

At least the skiing is lousy this year. Honestly it's one of the worst ski seasons in Sierra Nevada history, and that's after 2 other bad ones prior to this. Strangely, 2010-2011 was the BEST ski season in Sierra Nevada history. I visited Mammoth in late July 2011, and while the ski resort was closed, there was enough snow to still ski! There was acutally more snow there on July 4 (the last day they were open in 2011) than there is right now in February.

Still, it would have been nice to ski during the day and play VP at night, even with the crap conditions, especially with 4 free lift tickets.

Will definitely go to the Harvey's diamond lounge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan there is definitely NOT a typical player in your spot. You are unique. If there were another 7 Stars player who wanted to book a 5 night stay at a casino where he hadn't played before he would probably call HIS host at his HOME CASINO to book it and not even bother calling the other property.

---

I'm not as unique as you think.

There are plenty of players who earned Seven Stars earlier in 2014, then stopped playing for whatever reason, perhaps because they didn't see the point of it after getting to Seven Stars.

I might be a bit unique in my obsession with maximizing benefits, but plenty of people not as extreme as I am would be in the same spot here.

Honestly, I've never heard of a host refusing to tell you if a certain amount of play will earn you a comp room. Usually you ask the host, "Hey if I play this much, can you get me a room?", and the answer is either "yes, if you actually play that much" or "no". Not, "I won't tell you. Try it and find out what happens."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I'm not as unique as you think.

There are plenty of players who earned Seven Stars earlier in 2014, then stopped playing for whatever reason, perhaps because they didn't see the point of it after getting to Seven Stars.

---

I have been following a poster named "Sionow" who is Seven Stars but decided not to play anymore (other than free play); he posts regarding "My Farewell Tour" on another message board. I believe you can find it by googling his blog name and post title.


FAB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Why did you edit your post which previously said you agreed with synergistic?

I don't have any dupes here. Alan can verify IPs are different.

---

Heh, nope, I'm not Dan - I'm just a chick who thinks the comp game is almost as much fun to play as VP itself. That means a great deal of what Dan shares is valuable to me - and while I don't always think he's got much of a leg to stand on for his own part, I do tend to agree with his stances.

Actually, after my father hits 7* this spring, his play will be significantly lower than mine, and I'll still fully expect CET to put him up in his own room for the next couple of years - without giving him the runaround. I appreciate straightforward business relationships, and my relationship with a casino (and its hosts) definitely counts as a business relationship.


And alan, i think it's quite a stretch to call the offer the host made a legitimate conditional offer - all he seemed to do was promise that he'd see what kind of offer he could make after the play actually occurred. I do think he was well within his rights, I just think it was kind of silly - "You have a sketchy play history, so the only way I will take your commission is if you trust me to make an offer I'm totally unwilling to spell out right now..."

Dan, suffice it to say that every host in the TR system can look you up on their computer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by synergistic

Heh, nope, I'm not Dan - I'm just a chick who thinks the comp game is almost as much fun to play as VP itself. That means a great deal of what Dan shares is valuable to me - and while I don't always think he's got much of a leg to stand on for his own part, I do tend to agree with his stances.

Actually, after my father hits 7* this spring, his play will be significantly lower than mine, and I'll still fully expect CET to put him up in his own room for the next couple of years - without giving him the runaround. I appreciate straightforward business relationships, and my relationship with a casino (and its hosts) definitely counts as a business relationship.


And alan, i think it's quite a stretch to call the offer the host made a legitimate conditional offer - all he seemed to do was promise that he'd see what kind of offer he could make after the play actually occurred. I do think he was well within his rights, I just think it was kind of silly - "You have a sketchy play history, so the only way I will take your commission is if you trust me to make an offer I'm totally unwilling to spell out right now..."

---

It's funny, I keep assuming that any "unknown" name here is a dude, and then I keep finding I'm wrong. First Chimp, and now you.

I'm glad that you find my posts useful, and I'm even more glad that you usually agree with me!

Your point about the straightforward business relationship is a good one. While I have definitely done my best to maximize my benefits from the Seven Stars program, I have still followed its rules and guidelines. So I don't think it's right that I get penalized for earning it all at once and then staying a bunch of times without playing. They designed it that way, and yet you're supposed to feel guilty or something for using it that way.

Also, another pet peeve I have is WSOP.com. I actually DID play at Caesars Las Vegas and the Rio when I stayed there -- except I played on WSOP.com Nevada at their high limit poker games, and generated a lot of rake for them. They promote the hell out of this thing and keep encouraging you to play it from your room (even the Do Not Disturb sign at the Rio claims you're playing on it), yet you are considered a no-player if you stay and just play on there. Oddly enough, you can even earn Seven Stars by playing exclusively on there, so I don't see why they consider that different than staying and playing VP, slots, or craps.

Anyway if they have a problem with unlimited free stays with the Seven Stars program, independent of further play, then they shouldn't offer it.

Dan Druff,

Why do you continue to play at CET? With your promise to play that amount of coin in and asking for a 5 night stay I feel that is very reasonable. CET should have stepped way up to the plate on that one. A promise to play that amount of coin in for a 5 night stay is sounding like a bilateral contract. As long as you honor your part of the agreement they should honor their part.

Why do you continue to work the host for a 5 night stay? If he says no then personally I would just walk away. I'm sure there are a number of other casinos that would like your play and offer you free rooms.

It appears that a number of people in this forum are hung up on the CET 7 Stars program. Again I really feel that CET is not the company that they once were. CET is weak and grumbling. For gawds sake they can't even pay their debt. As far as 7 Stars is concerned today it's not much of a program. CET is stripping the card of it's value.

The bottom line here is you want to play a large number of coin in. They apparently don't value you as a 7 Stars card holder because of your lack of play. Maybe it's time to man up and make a change. Take your business else where. I'm sure other casinos would love to have you. Good luck in whatever you choose to do. Remember your playing for a 7 Stars status. If it's that important to you I hope you win a good amount of your coin in. It would be a shame to lose all that money to a company that doesn't appreciate you as a patron.

Quad AAAA's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quad AAAA's

Dan Druff,

Why do you continue to play at CET? With your promise to play that amount of coin in and asking for a 5 night stay I feel that is very reasonable. CET should have stepped way up to the plate on that one. A promise to play that amount of coin in for a 5 night stay is sounding like a bilateral contract. As long as you honor your part of the agreement they should honor their part.

Why do you continue to work the host for a 5 night stay? If he says no then personally I would just walk away. I'm sure there are a number of other casinos that would like your play and offer you free rooms.

It appears that a number of people in this forum are hung up on the CET 7 Stars program. Again I really feel that CET is not the company that they once were. CET is weak and grumbling. For gawds sake they can't even pay their debt. As far as 7 Stars is concerned today it's not much of a program. CET is stripping the card of it's value.

The bottom line here is you want to play a large number of coin in. They apparently don't value you as a 7 Stars card holder because of your lack of play. Maybe it's time to man up and make a change. Take your business else where. I'm sure other casinos would love to have you. Good luck in whatever you choose to do. Remember your playing for a 7 Stars status. If it's that important to you I hope you win a good amount of your coin in. It would be a shame to lose all that money to a company that doesn't appreciate you as a patron.

Quad AAAA's

---

I play at CET because they have, by far, the best rewards program with guaranteed benefits.

I also like that you can use these benefits at many casinos across the US.

This is good for a play like me who does a lot of play in a short time, but then goes a long time without continuing to play.

But yes, I do have to put up with a lot of BS and fail by CET. I've said before that what's good about CET is also what's bad about CET. You can sometimes gain by utilizing their contradictory policies (like the CCS being able to give you more than the hosts), but you also go through a lot of frustration and confusion with them.