Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 52

Thread: Eldorado Resorts buys Caesars -- what you need to know

  1. #21
    CET has and can do whatever they say they will or whatever they want to do without saying it. They've screwed over their loyal players before, they've continually eroded club value, and the reason they know they can get away with these things is because they know how addicted so many of their Diamond and Seven Stars players are to their slot club status.

  2. #22
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    CET has and can do whatever they say they will or whatever they want to do without saying it. They've screwed over their loyal players before, they've continually eroded club value, and the reason they know they can get away with these things is because they know how addicted so many of their Diamond and Seven Stars players are to their slot club status.
    Perhaps some will NOW understand why I don't just keep replaying my wins to win "millions" with the strategies. I'm still maintaining one better LEAVE after a reasonable win. And I once enjoyed a dual buffet twice a month that now has suddenly degraded to a single buffet twice a year. I AM excited about the Elderado as the Horseshoe has seen a rapid decline in the VP machines.

  3. #23
    Originally Posted by slingshot View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    CET has and can do whatever they say they will or whatever they want to do without saying it. They've screwed over their loyal players before, they've continually eroded club value, and the reason they know they can get away with these things is because they know how addicted so many of their Diamond and Seven Stars players are to their slot club status.
    Perhaps some will NOW understand why I don't just keep replaying my wins to win "millions" with the strategies. I'm still maintaining one better LEAVE after a reasonable win. And I once enjoyed a dual buffet twice a month that now has suddenly degraded to a single buffet twice a year. I AM excited about the Elderado as the Horseshoe has seen a rapid decline in the VP machines.
    This has nothing to do with it. You cant "win millions" because it WON'T "win millions."

  4. #24
    Here's a heads-up from the Las Vegas Advisor. "Anthony Curtis" quotes from the Wall Street Journal: "Part of Eldorado's success is its management's ability to slim down on unnecessary guest inducements, such as free drinks and hotel stays. Caesars has done better in this regard, too, cutting its perks in half to roughly 14% of revenue since 2016. But Eldorado is better: Its similar metric is around 10%."

    As Scooby would say, "Ruh Row."

    I love that phrase, "Unnecessary guest inducements." LOL. Once your addicts have reached a certain "maturity" (that's the biz term), I guess you gotta wean them off the freebies. Make 'em pay. Through the nose, baby.

    Well, this should be a fine self-imploding mess. It's a shame I'm not gonna live another 40 years to see independents buy out these failing, flailing mega-corps.

    Note: I actually have a reasonably intelligent observation. Since CET income was increasingly from non-gaming sources, and since El Dorado probably derived a smaller percentage of their revenue from non-gaming sources than did CET with its huge shows and clubs, the fact that El Dorado pumped just 10% back into inducements actually suggests this is worse than it looks for people who actually gamble. And it does not look good.

  5. #25
    Doe's anyone know about reward credits earned with the Total Rewards Visa card? Are these rewards SAFE? Should they be spent quickly before El Dorado "SLIMS DOWN"?

  6. #26
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Here's a heads-up from the Las Vegas Advisor. "Anthony Curtis" quotes from the Wall Street Journal: "Part of Eldorado's success is its management's ability to slim down on unnecessary guest inducements, such as free drinks and hotel stays. Caesars has done better in this regard, too, cutting its perks in half to roughly 14% of revenue since 2016. But Eldorado is better: Its similar metric is around 10%."

    As Scooby would say, "Ruh Row."

    I love that phrase, "Unnecessary guest inducements." LOL. Once your addicts have reached a certain "maturity" (that's the biz term), I guess you gotta wean them off the freebies. Make 'em pay. Through the nose, baby.

    Well, this should be a fine self-imploding mess. It's a shame I'm not gonna live another 40 years to see independents buy out these failing, flailing mega-corps.

    Note: I actually have a reasonably intelligent observation. Since CET income was increasingly from non-gaming sources, and since El Dorado probably derived a smaller percentage of their revenue from non-gaming sources than did CET with its huge shows and clubs, the fact that El Dorado pumped just 10% back into inducements actually suggests this is worse than it looks for people who actually gamble. And it does not look good.
    Redietz, isn’t this the way all business promotional programs work? They give you something (coupon, rebates, free something, etc) to get you hooked on their product and then when you are hooked (some, mostly liberals, call it “addicted”) they back it off. That’s just good business.

    I think the phase “ unnecessary guest inducements” is the correct way of saying it. If your customer is already hooked on your product, and going to use it with or without the inducements, then the inducements are unnecessary. I expect they are tracking this with computer programs with the player’s card.

    It’s never made sense to me how so many APs don’t understand casinos are a business and their purpose of existing is to return money to their shareholders or the people who own them, if they are privately owned. A well run casino is just doing what they should be doing by reducing comps to players that will play with or without them.

  7. #27
    LOL. Bob21, sounds as if you should be living here with me, on the eastern Tennessee border, intersecting southern Virginia and western North Carolina. You'd fit right in with all of the tobacco execs.

    You may have mistaken me for someone who buys into the casino model as just your average, everyday business using the proper, societally approved capitalist means of attracting and keeping customers.

    If you want to debate what is or isn't addicting, I suggest someone other than me. Someone with real expertise in addiction. Maybe get in touch with those who have spent a lifetime scientifically studying it. I'm sure you can hold your own. I suggest, as a starting point, reading "Addiction By Design" by Natasha Dow Schull. After you've read it, you can contact her at natasha.schull@nyu.edu or give her a call. You can then post your debate with her right here for all to appreciate. If things don't go well with her, I have a friend in the neuroscience med school at ETSU who just got a couple of large grants. He's been studying addiction for more than a decade now -- he might be willing to debate you, also. But not during basketball season -- he likes his hoops.

    Anyway, good luck in your debates. I'll ask you every month or so how the debates are going for you, just as a motivation.

    P.S. In case anyone is wondering my attitude regarding casinos as businesses, I'm of the same mind as Erik Killmonger in the movie, Black Panther. "We're gonna burn them. Burn 'em all." I'm also good with the finale of Stephen King's "The Stand."
    Last edited by redietz; 06-30-2019 at 08:19 AM.

  8. #28
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    LOL. Bob21, sounds as if you should be living here with me, on the eastern Tennessee border, intersecting southern Virginia and western North Carolina. You'd fit right in with all of the tobacco execs.

    You may have mistaken me for someone who buys into the casino model as just your average, everyday business using the proper, societally approved capitalist means of attracting and keeping customers.

    If you want to debate what is or isn't addicting, I suggest someone other than me. Someone with real expertise in addiction. Maybe get in touch with those who have spent a lifetime scientifically studying it. I'm sure you can hold your own. I suggest, as a starting point, reading "Addiction By Design" by Natasha Dow Schull. After you've read it, you can contact her at natasha.schull@nyu.edu or give her a call. You can then post your debate with her right here for all to appreciate. If things don't go well with her, I have a friend in the neuroscience med school at ETSU who just got a couple of large grants. He's been studying addiction for more than a decade now -- he might be willing to debate you, also. But not during basketball season -- he likes his hoops.

    Anyway, good luck in your debates. I'll ask you every month or so how the debates are going for you, just as a motivation.

    P.S. In case anyone is wondering my attitude regarding casinos as businesses, I'm of the same mind as Erik Killmonger in the movie, Black Panther. "We're gonna burn them. Burn 'em all." I'm also good with the finale of Stephen King's "The Stand."
    Redietz, you went off on a what is an “addiction” tangent. Please reread my post. That wasn’t my point in making my post. It was you poking fun of the phase “unnecessary guest inducements”. There is no reason to poke fun at this practice since all companies do this. That’s just smart business. Once you get a customer hooked on your product, then it makes sense to stop or reduce the “inducements”. If a customer will use your product with or without these “inducements”, why should a company keep incurring this expense?

    As far as arguing if casinos are different than other businesses they aren’t in the fundamental aspect that their purpose is to make money for their shareholders. This is why all businesses exists. If they didn’t make money, they wouldn’t exists. It’s that simple. It’s another debate arguing over the methods any business uses to make money. If you think it’s wrong for a company to stop or reduce inducements to their loyal customers than most businesses are guilty as charged.

    Back to my point. All well run business back off of their incentives once they get their customers loyal (or “addicted” using your preferred word) to their product. In the case of casinos, that product is gambling:

  9. #29
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    As far as arguing if casinos are different than other businesses they aren’t in the fundamental aspect that their purpose is to make money for their shareholders. This is why all businesses exists.
    Sorry, but I have to rank making money as only third as to why a business exits. There are a lot of non profit businesses. My health care provider is one of them. The number one reason why a business exits is to make a product or service for consumers. I rank second, its to provide jobs for employees and I rank third the shareholders. If it was only the shareholders no company would give to charity or even treat their employees decently. Of course, some employers treat their employees like shit, but many don't.

  10. #30
    Originally Posted by Midwest Player View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    As far as arguing if casinos are different than other businesses they aren’t in the fundamental aspect that their purpose is to make money for their shareholders. This is why all businesses exists.
    Sorry, but I have to rank making money as only third as to why a business exits. There are a lot of non profit businesses. My health care provider is one of them. The number one reason why a business exits is to make a product or service for consumers. I rank second, its to provide jobs for employees and I rank third the shareholders. If it was only the shareholders no company would give to charity or even treat their employees decently. Of course, some employers treat their employees like shit, but many don't.
    You’re wrong Bosox. Your answer is the classic liberal answer to why businesses exists. I lived in the northeast for a while so I get how the northeast liberals think.

    First to your point about a non-profit business. Let’s keep this discussion to business that are trying to make a profit. A non-profit business is a tax-exempt organization formed for religious, charitable, artistic, health, educational, etc purposes. This is NOT what I’m referring to. Casinos are not non-profit organizations.

    Private businesses are started for the sole purpose of making money for their owners, or in the case of public companies, for their shareholders. No one starts a private business for the purpose of providing jobs. Jobs are a by-product of a business. I’m surprised you didn’t know this. Sounds like you’ve been living on one of the left coasts too long. You need to move to the south or midwest where you can learn something. Lol.

    As far as a business providing a product or service to make money, of course that’s true or the business would go out of business.

    When a corporatation looks at expanding or developing a new product, they do this with one consideration in mind. How much money will this make our shareholders. Business don’t expand for the purpose of providing more jobs. It’s a by-product of their expansion, which they see as making more money for their shareholders.

  11. #31
    Bosox, one more comment. I reread your post and I can see that you don’t get it when it comes to businesses. The reason most businesses treat their employees decently is because this is the best way to retain the top talent, which does guess what? Makes the most money for their shareholders.

    Business that don’t treat their employees decently usually go out of business or do poorly. The profit motive is actually the best motive for marking sure businesses treat employees decently. A satisfied employee works harder and does more to help his company, which in turn drives more profit to the shareholders.

    One of the best examples is Chick-fil-A. Look at its stock over the past 10 years. It’s doing better than all their fast food competitors. While they have good food, one of the primary reasons is how well they treat their employees. This translates into more money to their shareholders.

    Contrary to what most liberals think, the profit motive of a business is the best motive for companies to treat its employees and customer “decently”. There you learned something, and you didn’t even need to move to the south. And this lesson was free.

  12. #32
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    The reason most businesses treat their employees decently is because this is the best way to retain the top talent, which does guess what? Makes the most money for their shareholders.
    Not always, and that business model doesn't do what shareholders really want. It is not enough in the shareholder model to make a steady profit. What the shareholder model needs is GROWTH, which means MORE profit every year. Eventually what many businesses have to do to achieve this is cut costs. Generally this involves a loss of quality, but there is a lag time before the customer notices, if at all. Ideally, the shareholders sell during this lag time before the profits and share prices fall and leave some other sucker holding the bag for when the bubble bursts.

  13. #33
    Originally Posted by Midwest Player View Post
    If it was only the shareholders no company would give to charity
    Giving to charity is a tax write off, as well as a form of marketing/advertising.

  14. #34
    Originally Posted by pepe View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    The reason most businesses treat their employees decently is because this is the best way to retain the top talent, which does guess what? Makes the most money for their shareholders.
    Not always, and that business model doesn't do what shareholders really want. It is not enough in the shareholder model to make a steady profit. What the shareholder model needs is GROWTH, which means MORE profit every year. Eventually what many businesses have to do to achieve this is cut costs. Generally this involves a loss of quality, but there is a lag time before the customer notices, if at all. Ideally, the shareholders sell during this lag time before the profits and share prices fall and leave some other sucker holding the bag for when the bubble bursts.
    Of course, not always. Businesses are run by people and people are fallible, make mistakes, and yes there are some bad people in our country. So all business aren't going to make the right decisions all the time. The good news is poorly run companies go bankrupt, and well run ones usually don't. Well run companies treat their employees decently and pay more so they do better. Contrary to what liberals think, the profit motive is the primary motive for why companies treat employees well.

    But as far as what Shareholders want...they want profit, as much profit as possible. They really don't care if the company is a growth company or not. That is why we invest in the stock market...to make money. People who pick individual stocks try to find the ones that will make them the most money. Sometimes these are growth stocks, sometimes they are not...they are dividend stocks. I don't know how much you know about stocks or companies but by your post, it doesn't appear like much.

    As far as companies cutting costs (which I'm assuming you mean laying people off), this usually happens when a company is making something the market no longer wants. This happens in a dynamic market. We all know what happened to the stagecoach companies. They went out of business when cars came into play. Blockbuster went by the wayside because people no longer rent videos. But what about amazon? It keeps expanding and hiring more people. This is what happens when a company is making or doing something the market (us people) want.

    I can see you have a liberal perspective of the stock market. You need to understand it goes up in the long run. If you buy and hold, no one will be left to hold that bag (as you said, we don't want any sucker holding any bag. lol). Everyone will be a winner! If you follow this strategy, you will have made more during any time period over any other asset, real estate, gold, bonds, etc. The key is don't try to time the market. Invest some money every year (really every month - that's what I do) during your lifetime and you'll become a very wealthy person.

    Btw,do you and Midwest Player live close together? It doesn't look like either one of you understand basic economics or how companies work.

  15. #35
    Originally Posted by pepe View Post
    Originally Posted by Midwest Player View Post
    If it was only the shareholders no company would give to charity
    Giving to charity is a tax write off, as well as a form of marketing/advertising.
    By the way, I don't think any company should give to charity. People should give to charities. A company should do what it's designed to do....make money for it's owners, which as a by-product provides jobs, and a service and/or product to us consumers to make our lives better. The free market system is what gave us our high standard of living. Personally, I don't want my company choosing a charity to give too. This should be done by individuals or outside groups like churches, etc. I know all businesses do this now, since liberals don't understand what a company's purpose is.

    It's got to where I can't buy something at a fast food place in my area without them asking me if I want to donate to some charity they've chosen. I usually tell them no, give me my food I just ordered, I'll decide on my own what charity I'm going to support. I'm polite when I do this. But it does aggravate me that most retail shops (Walgreens just started doing this in my area) always want me to donate something to some charity. I get it that they will usually match my donation. This new trend with businesses is probably the result of people like MidWest Player who think this is a great idea. Liberals love the idea of other people supporting charity, and businesses doing everything except what their primary purpose is.

  16. #36
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    I can see you have a liberal perspective of the stock market. You need to understand it goes up in the long run. If you buy and hold, no one will be left to hold that bag (as you said, we don't want any sucker holding any bag. lol). Everyone will be a winner! If you follow this strategy, you will have made more during any time period over any other asset, real estate, gold, bonds, etc. The key is don't try to time the market. Invest some money every year (really every month - that's what I do) during your lifetime and you'll become a very wealthy person.
    You make the mistake of assuming growth will last forever. Eventually the bubble bursts. This isn't a "liberal" perspective, if anything modern so-called "conservatism" is actually just another form of liberalism.

    The real truth is our economy is all smoke and mirrors. We hardly make any actual product of real value anymore. It's like a giant pyramid scheme, thats why neocons and neolibs alike want to import the entire third world, so they can have more consumers to keep reselling the same product to at ever increasing markup.

    GDP and stock prices are not a measure of the real economy. The real economy comes from things actually being made, something we don't really do in this country anymore, because it's cheaper to outsource it to the Third World, or import third worlders because they work cheaper and are willing to put up with worse living conditions because it's still better than their home country, which brings standards down for everyone except the people at the top, the 1% elites.

    Many of us hoped Trump would do something to put a stop to this, but so far he has been all talk.

    But you probably don't care, you're likely a boomer and will be dead before the bubble bursts. (I judge you as a boomer because you haven't yet left behind the tired old concept of "liberal" (aka neoliberal) and "conservative" (aka neoconservative aka liberal driving the speed limit).

  17. #37
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    The free market system is what gave us our high standard of living.
    Don't see how, because we have never had a "free market system".

    The "free market" libertarians jerk off to is just as much of an unattainable unicorn as the "classless society" communists jerk off to.

    The reality is, power will continue to concentrate where it is already concentrated. Government, corporation, it makes no difference. Any organization with too much power will use it to gain more.

    It doesn't matter whether you vote Republican or Democrat. Both are owned by the same powers that be, the whole thing is a dog and pony show.

  18. #38
    Originally Posted by pepe View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    The free market system is what gave us our high standard of living.
    Don't see how, because we have never had a "free market system".

    The "free market" libertarians jerk off to is just as much of an unattainable unicorn as the "classless society" communists jerk off to.

    The reality is, power will continue to concentrate where it is already concentrated. Government, corporation, it makes no difference. Any organization with too much power will use it to gain more.

    It doesn't matter whether you vote Republican or Democrat. Both are owned by the same powers that be, the whole thing is a dog and pony show.
    Name:  sums_it_up.jpg
Views: 457
Size:  33.0 KB

  19. #39
    Tableplay, good carton! This is the reason Trump came to power in America. It’s because the American people, both Democates and Republicans, saw that both parties were beholding to the same people, those in power who didn’t care about the little guy who works. This is also what brought Reagan to power, and we all know how much the liberals hate Reagan.

    l agree, over time, the Republican Party has become not much different than the Democrate Party. Both do what they can to stay in power. Trump did something that shocked the pundents and the world. He won by appealing to the working man and women in America, the people who make this country work, the people who pay taxes and obey the law. His message wasn’t to the freeloaders, the illegal aliens, the criminals...you know, the people the Democates and liberal Republicans cater to.

    The liberals, like MidWest Player, hate Trump because Midwest Player and others have become robot zombies still believing the lies of the left. Heck, Midwest Player probably still beleieves poverty programs help people, rather than keep them down.

    To your point pepe, I agree with much of what you had to say....and Trump does too. As a country, you have to make something to add value. Trump does NOT agreed with all the trade agreements that both parties have signed over the years, and led to jobs and manufacturing being outsourced to other countries. This is partly what brought Trump to power.

    Trump is trying to renegotiate these trade agreements. This doesn’t happen overnight, but he’s making progress. Currently, he’s doing that with NAFTA and he’s done it with our China trade agreements. I don’t have time to post all the articles on this. Please google Trump and trade agreements and you’ll find a lot of articles on this. Again, Trump is making progress, but you got to remember it’s an uphill battle. He’s working against all MidWest Player’s liberal friends in congress who only care about power and don’t care about the little guy playing by the rules or our freedoms. These liberal Democates and Republican have got a lot of people like Midwest Player brainwashed, so it’s not going to be easy. It takes time to unbrainwash these people.

    Think about it. Midwest Player doesn’t even know the primary reason businesses operate. Sad.

    One last comment: Because MidWest Player is a liberal and probably got dropped on his head multiple times as a baby, you’re probably going to see him go back to the liberal’s playbook and call me a racists. This is the go-to-name liberals call people when they are losing a debate.
    Last edited by Bob21; 07-03-2019 at 05:06 AM.

  20. #40
    Bob21 wrote:


    "One last comment: Because MidWest Player is a liberal and probably got dropped on his head multiple times as a baby, you’re probably going to see him go back to the liberal’s playbook and call me a racists. This is the go-to-name liberals call people when they are losing a debate. "


    Bob, can you at least give the guy a break! MWP, is a nice guy who has provided very well for his family throughout his life. He only periodically instigates trouble just like you do only you do it on a regular basis. Overall MWP has been a real good member on blackjack boards over the years.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Resorts World NYC to Atlantic City Match?
    By DOUGLA718 in forum Eastern US & Non-US Casinos
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-30-2019, 12:21 PM
  2. Former Revel Resorts to Reopen in 2017 as "Ten"
    By DaGreek23 in forum Eastern US & Non-US Casinos
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-01-2016, 07:35 PM
  3. Resorts World closer to reality
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-20-2016, 06:40 PM
  4. What's on our May 16, 2015 Best Buys TV Show
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Money, Shopping, Real Estate, Investing
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-15-2015, 03:03 AM
  5. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-07-2013, 02:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •