Any Experience with M Resort $500 Loss Rebate?

[nerakil]

Hey FABismonte, excellent trip report, very detailed as always! Thanks for sharing the gaming experience at M Resort.

[FABismonte]

Suppose we substituted the loss rebate as meal tickets instead of slot machine vouchers?

Hi Alan:

Not sure where you are going, but I do stand ready to treat you for a meal if we are in Vegas at the same time.

Cheers, FAB

[Alan Mendelson]

Fab always happy to meet up!

[pkspins]

Fab, thank you for your detailed report. It really helped me understand this discussion better. BTW, the way the desk representative used the term cash out is typical. It's all money that the machine(s) put out in terms of pay on bet, not just the amount you cash out with. Mlife, as one example, has this information by casino on the online W/L reports. But many just tell you your net W/L and maybe total W-2 wins, like CET.

I'm not going to try this at home, but I can see now how you fellows that claim to make money at working these rebates can do this. If you can maintain the discipline, as Fab did, to bank the win and forgo the rebate when you do meet your win goal, you lock in that profit. When you go and lose, like Fab's wife did, you can run the rebate through once, ideally in something lower denomination with a good paytable like mickey's suggestions, continue to maintain discipline and take the cash that gives you and bank that. The times you got lucky plus the proceeds from running the rebates when you didn't win the first time I could see leading to a profit overall.

One question I do have, for those who say they make money off of this - does your profit come solely from working the rebates themselves or do you factor other things into it? Like the future free play offers that putting in all this play should generate, or the points in the players programs? Depending on how you work those - after all someone on here mentioned selling beer vouchers in the parking lot to local cheap beer aficionados as an advantage play, so I'm assuming anything goes - they could also be a source of profit. I was just wondering if other things were figuring into the "I could make $100K off an $xxx rebate" claims.

[redietz]

Personally, I would never factor those things into it.

I think I've done rebates at the Trop, the Plaza, Cosmo, and the old Maxim. The Cosmo rebate, when it first started, didn't require that you lose the first day to claim it. If you won, you could delay using the rebate until a day you lost. That option didn't last long, but I took advantage. I won the first day, then lost the second day and ran the rebate through.

Last I checked, Westgate has a $100 rebate program. They may have stopped it in the last month or so, but it's worth giving them a call.

[RS__]

One question I do have, for those who say they make money off of this - does your profit come solely from working the rebates themselves or do you factor other things into it? Like the future free play offers that putting in all this play should generate, or the points in the players programs? Depending on how you work those - after all someone on here mentioned selling beer vouchers in the parking lot to local cheap beer aficionados as an advantage play, so I'm assuming anything goes - they could also be a source of profit. I was just wondering if other things were figuring into the "I could make $100K off an $xxx rebate" claims.

For a loss rebate play, I don't consider any of the "extra" stuff as part of the value of it when doing the math on it, unless it's something worthwhile -- typically, the mail, comps, points, etc. will not be worthwhile.

[mickeycrimm]

Fab there comes a time when even this mild mannered reporter for a great metropolitan media conglomerate loses his cool over the stupidity some people express. Suppose we substituted the loss rebate as meal tickets instead of slot machine vouchers?

Alan, you are the one who has been dishing it out the whole time. You call everything an AP posts up here stupid and expect us to just take it. You've been doing that forever. No more Mr. Nice Guy. Go to hell. This is what I really think. It amazes me that someone as math deficient as you has succeeded in life. Your math is not only faulty it is incredibly stupid. But what amazes me more is your arrogance in your stupidity. When it comes to math you are as dense as they come. I've got one more equation for you. When you take stupid and multiply it by 29 you get Alan Mendelson.

[Alan Mendelson]

I'm not really that math deficient. I came out of college as a trained economist from the Maxwell School of Public Policy at Syracuse... as well as having a degree in TV and radio.

You may excel, mickey, in arithmetic, but your reasoning is way off.

I hate to bring this up, but this is why we had a multi year battle of the two dice in a cup problem. There is the arithmetic answer, and there is the answer that includes reasoning.

So it is with loss rebates.

Sure -- go ahead and add the value of the loss rebate to the pay table of the game, if that's what your arithmetic tells you to do. But if you reason you will understand that the loss rebate is not added to the pay table. Duh. And the loss rebate does not improve the return of the game. Duh.

Con men and crooked bookkeepers and Ponzi scheme operators all have wonderful ways to cook the books to show their victims what they want to see. Frankly, you could do the same thing with casino "advantage play." As Rob says, after losing your thousand dollars you can say "my room was worth $235, and I had $200 of free play, and I got a loss rebate of $600, and I got tickets to Elton John worth $400" but in the end you still lost $1,000 out of your pocket.

Now, if you were going to pay for the room, and pay for Elton John ($235 + $400 = $635) anyway, then you could reason that your actual cost was $335. On the other hand, you could have stayed with your old college roommate in Henderson and paid $400 for the Elton John tickets and used the $235 that you would have spent on the room on a thank you dinner for your host. The "economist" looks at the opportunity costs of each transaction.

I look at the opportunity costs of a loss rebate and what I see is what everyone but an "AP" will see. In fact, I see what the casinos see. I see that you had to lose $500 of real money to get back $500 of free play which the house has an edge to win from you.

Mickey, earlier you wrote: "If I could do a $1000 freeplay loss rebate everyday for a year I guarantee you I would make $100,000+. And yes, it would be the loss rebates that caused me to win." I told you that you would go broke, and you would.

You would go broke because before you could get any of the freeplay rebate you would have to lose $1,000 and then you would be playing the free play with the casino having the advantage against you. So you not only would have to get lucky with the $1,000 of free play each day just to keep it (convert free play into $1,000 of cash) but you'd have to get super lucky to convert the free play into more than $1,000 every day to reach your goal of having a $100,000 profit.

Let's look at what you face if you played a game returning 99.6%.

Each day you play your $1,000 of cash your return would be $996.00 and that would get you how much free play, Mickey? FOUR DOLLARS. Do you think the casino will give you that FOUR DOLLARS, or do you think you'd have to lose a bit more... say $1,000.

So suppose you lose your $1,000 each day and trot off the cage to pick up your free play voucher. Oops. You discover you can get $500 that can be played in one week, and another $500 that can be played one week after that. Okay, you reason, this is a long term project -- you have a year to turn a $100,000 profit.

So you come back to the casino a week later and you run the first $500 voucher through and lo and behold this time with a 99.6% return you are down $2.

You see Mickey... you keep talking about the math. But the math is always against you.

Now, how do you win? You win by hitting big payoffs -- or any payoffs that give you a return greater than the amount of the initial bet. That is what I've been saying all along. Sometimes (and hopefully it's the case for everyone) the payoffs with the return come with your initial bankroll so you don't have to hit bottom to claim the loss rebate. But if you have hit bottom it becomes even harder to win back the initial bankroll... which in your example, Mickey, is $1,000 a day.

Yes, Rob is right. Casinos love to give loss rebates. And they hope every player claims their loss rebate. Dear Lord, oh how they wish every player would claim their loss rebate.

[mickeycrimm]

Yes, Rob is right. Casinos love to give loss rebates. And they hope every player claims their loss rebate. Dear Lord, oh how they wish every player would claim their loss rebate.

Alan, there are a lot of things to comment on in your post but I will start with this one here. Loss rebate promotions to the general public for any substantial amount of money like $500 or $1000 are not popular with casino execs. They are usually a last ditch effort by a struggling casino to try and generate business.

When Sienna, that Rob talks about, put up the loss rebate promo it was on it's last legs. Sienna was one of those casinos that got raked over the coals by AP's over the years because they were always struggling for business. Their marketers and managers kept coming up with promotions that AP's killed. That crew would get fired then the new crew would come up with promotions that AP's killed. That went on for a lot of years.

Revel had the grandaddy of all loss rebate promos when they offered $100,000 loss rebates to everyone in 2013. They did this because they were on the brink of bankruptcy and threw a hail mary pass at it. But then they disqualified their hi denom machines from the promo effectively killing a lot of business. It was business they didn't want....that of big bankrolled AP's. If they would have let those AP's work the promotion on high denom they would have lost millions. And where is Revel at today?

If these promos worked that well for the casinos you would see all casinos offering loss rebates to every customer everyday of the week. But you don't see that do you?

[mickeycrimm]

Deleted. Double post.

[Alan Mendelson]

mickey, casinos don't offer widespread loss rebates for the same reason they stopped giving same day cash back -- they don't want to be bothered.

Up until about ten years ago, Caesars Palace gave same day cash back. Many of us called it our "going home money." We'd stop by the players club desk (this was pre Total Rewards) and get a voucher from the desk person and then we'd go the cage. After a weekend I'd sometimes go home with 300-500. But that took a lot of manpower. There was someone at the players club and there was a long line at the cage.

could you imagine the lines now if they still offered something like that today? I'm sure you havent been at Caesars in the past couple of years but even Seven Stars have a line at the cage.

Bellagio still has a cash back program but it's automated and you download the play at a machine to play. Other casinos also have a system for automatically downloading. But the #1 reason they want to get rid of all of these related promotions is manpower. Ever been to any Total Rewards desk and youll see lines.

when loss rebates are split up into multiple days, the casinos are hoping you don't return. That gives them an even bigger profit.

But manpower is a huge cost for casinos these days. They'll do anything to eliminate people. Who ever thought craps games could be run without boxmen? Now it's standard with Caesars properties. And why did Caesars start to install drink ordering on slot machines? So cocktail waitresses would concentrate on deliveries and not taking orders and that saved people too.

Revel? the APs didn't break Revel. Revel had the APs in the palm of their hand. But Revel got into trouble with its promotion. Perhaps you never saw this, but read it and maybe you'll bet a better idea about loss rebates get you and they get you over and over again:

https://consumerist.com/2013/07/22/c...-you-gambling/

[mickeycrimm]

https://consumerist.com/2013/07/22/c...-you-gambling/

I remember the article. I wholeheartedly agree with the reporter on what casino execs are trying to do. But you are lumping in advantage gamblers with negative expectation gamblers. I have never done what casino execs expect me to do. I devise my own plan to get their money then go get it....and yes, the mathematics of it is a big part of it. When I started out in this business 21 years ago I was a homeless drifter. I started out on two bit advantage plays with a $20 bankroll. As the bankroll grew it opened up more opportunities. And it kept growing. For years now I've had a nice place to live, a nice car, a gambling bankroll, money in the bank.

Before I stumbled into advantage gambling, yes I stumbled into it quite by accident, I used to think "wouldn't it be nice to find a way to make money with no strings attached, no boss, not beholden to anyone, not answering to anyone." Well, EUREKA!!! I'VE FOUND IT!!! And I'm not going to change the way I do things because of non-believers.

[blackhole]

https://consumerist.com/2013/07/22/c...-you-gambling/

I remember the article. I wholeheartedly agree with the reporter on what casino execs are trying to do. But you are lumping in advantage gamblers with negative expectation gambler. I have never done what casino execs expect me to do. I devise my own plan to get their money then go get it....and yes, the mathematics of it is a big part of it. When I started out in this business 21 years ago I was a homeless drifter. I started out on two bit advantage plays with a $20 bankroll. As the bankroll grew it opened up more opportunities. And it kept growing. For years now I've had a nice place to live, a nice car, a gambling bankroll, money in the bank.

Before I stumbled into advantage gambling, yes I stumbled into it quite by accident, I used to think "wouldn't it be nice to find a way to make money with no strings attached, no boss, not beholden to anyone, not answering to anyone." Well, EUREKA!!! I'VE FOUND IT!!! And I'm not going to change the way I do things because of non-believers.

[mickeycrimm]

Blackasshole is an idiot.

[Alan Mendelson]

Be practical for a moment, Mickey. Do you ever plan on losing in order to collect a loss rebate? Of course you don't. Why? Because if you lose to collect a loss rebate you are negative and it becomes even harder to turn a profit from a negative position. You want to always be positive. Do you agree?

So do I have to say it one more time?

You want to win and hit winners with your own money... just like Fab did and like Rob did and like Rob's friend did at Revel. But in the event you lose like Mrs. Fab did the loss rebate gives you a second chance but loss rebates by themselves don't make you a winner.

Geez. Do we got it now?

[regnis]

Be practical for a moment, Mickey. Do you ever plan on losing in order to collect a loss rebate? Of course you don't. Why? Because if you lose to collect a loss rebate you are negative and it becomes even harder to turn a profit from a negative position. You want to always be positive. Do you agree?

So do I have to say it one more time?

You want to win and hit winners with your own money... just like Fab did and like Rob did and like Rob's friend did at Revel. But in the event you lose like Mrs. Fab did the loss rebate gives you a second chance but loss rebates by themselves don't make you a winner.

Geez. Do we got it now?

Alan-everything you just said is correct. And I don't want to sound like I've crossed to the dark side here, but isn't it also better to have the rebate than not? If you are going to wager $500, isn't it better to wager the $500 and have the rebate available if you lose? Isn't that a better wager?

No--you do not automatically win. But it "should" improve your overall result.

[dannyj]

Be practical for a moment, Mickey. Do you ever plan on losing in order to collect a loss rebate? Of course you don't. Why? Because if you lose to collect a loss rebate you are negative and it becomes even harder to turn a profit from a negative position. You want to always be positive. Do you agree?

So do I have to say it one more time?

You want to win and hit winners with your own money... just like Fab did and like Rob did and like Rob's friend did at Revel. But in the event you lose like Mrs. Fab did the loss rebate gives you a second chance but loss rebates by themselves don't make you a winner.

Geez. Do we got it now?

Alan-everything you just said is correct. And I don't want to sound like I've crossed to the dark side here, but isn't it also better to have the rebate than not? If you are going to wager $500, isn't it better to wager the $500 and have the rebate available if you lose? Isn't that a better wager?

No--you do not automatically win. But it "should" improve your overall result.

Regnis - Agree. Who wouldn't want a loss rebate if they we're going to gamble anyways? No one. Now, I wouldn't jump through hoops to get one, nor would I change my original method of play much like playing slots instead of VP, but I would undoubtedly play higher variance games like DDB and TDB.

I think most of this debate has been semantics. No, loss rebates by themselves do not make anyone a winner. But by definition they do cushion a loss and give one a "second chance" to recoup the original loss. Either one of those scenarios if one is going to gamble anyway, is better than not having the rebate.

P.S.
I've never used or have been offered one.

[Alan Mendelson]

Of course you want a second chance but you can't depend on the second chance to win. and hopefully you'll win on your original money so you never need to claim the insurance. remember nobody ever wins with insurance the only one who wins with insurance is the insurance company

[AxelWolf]

Casinos don't have to "mess around" with loss rebates, it's all automated, the casino doesn't have to do much other than implementing the program. It's a standard feature on most slot systems nowadays, even the oldest outdated system have it, so claiming the casinos don't do it because it's a hassle is just not true.

Loss rebates are good for the casino as long as there are poppies around, since there are far more poppies than smart gamblers around, the casinos benefit. If only smart players played Loss rebates the casinos would absoulutly lose money.

The avrage person will do many things that negate their EV. Lose more than the rebate itself. Forget to pick up their loss rebate. Play the rebate money untill they have lost it all. Casinos also bennifit from getting new players information so they can market them.

[dannyj]

Of course you want a second chance but you can't depend on the second chance to win. and hopefully you'll win on your original money so you never need to claim the insurance. remember nobody ever wins with insurance the only one who wins with insurance is the insurance company

Alan - I don't think I heard anyone say that they depend on the second chance to win. Rather, play with discipline, play the best schedule you can find and recoup a high percentage of the rebate or more.