Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: Hooters is now being sold?

  1. #21
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    I disagree that Dan did not take this promo seriously. He brought his gf in to maximize the free play amount. And if you've read any history here, he has virtual epileptic attacks over $20 retail mistakes and feeling he's being stiffed free bottles of Gatorade.
    Yeah, it is kind of funny that in another thread, Dan Druff referred to me as dramatic, when he goes ballistic over $5 and $10 incidents when he feels he has been wronged. But that's fine.

    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    "Free play is free play, not free money."

    This is exactly correct. Casinos have the right to do anything they choose when they offer a free play promo.
    Dan Druff specifically said that these promos didn't quite cross into "illegal" territory. But they are misleading. And if 99% of the people walk away feeling they were mislead, screwed or scammed, you have to wonder if such a promotion didn't achieve just the opposite of it's intended purpose. These things are about getting new players in the door, not having players first impression being "that place is a rip off". Not going to get much return customers who feel THAT way.

    Just seems to be another of those bad ideas things that comes out of business school, as opposed to when real casino people ran the casino business.

    Dan has a strong drive to keep people honest. The world needs more people like him, so everyone else who just rolls over and takes it.. well won't have to roll over and take it as often. I've seen stories of the man gettin shit straightened out over a video game that was taking quarters with no play.

    You guys are right about business people running gambling stuff which they rarely seem to fully understand. Where I'm from we have poker clubs. Some of them were started by business guys and were first to the gray market and not busted. Things were great for years, but then they started doing shit all the regulars told them was a bad idea. They really only understand things on a simple 1 or 2 levels. Now that room is hurting and will likely never gain their share back. They blame it on geographic location, but a lot of it was making poor decisions.

    They decided they were going to be 24/7 on weekends. First night. I show up to play in the biggest game. There is also a private game that has been allowed to poach the bad players off the floor. Well the smart regs are like, fuck this. I'm not sitting around here paying time to play these other regs. Many many complaints were made, but nothing was done. The public big game started to die because fish were all called into the private game and drained Friday night. So I show up that first night to have a long all night session, game is down to headsup. 20 minutes into headsup, they tell us they have to break the table. I was happy to be able to play headsup for at least 1 hour. I forget the reason they gave, but it was a nonsensical reason. They were just too cheap and realized it was break even for them to operate that table, but I sure as fuck didn't come there to play lower. I'd brought in patrons to this joint who gave them 100s if not more in revenue. I don't say anything or expect anything, but when I looked back at the whole situation it pissed me off enough to not go there that often.

    So they saved $5 and probably cost themselves a few hundred. Fucking dipshits. Problem is I like most of the staff. The management that interfaces with customer is just told what to do. I get no satisfaction in seeing the place doing so poorly, because the business guys already made $$ hand over fist for years. Anyway.. I'm ranting off subject.

  2. #22
    Bottom line on any promotion is, regardless how deceptive or player-friendly or whatever it may be, it is the player's responsibility to know WTF they are doing. My guess is Dan didn't until he learned the facts at the slot club, in which case he should have just walked away.

    That promo likely reeled in a lot of new sign-ups, which was exactly the reason for it. And while most people would have been unpleasantly surprised and while very few would ever admit to it publicly, many of those also probably lost some of their own money playing on their new cards in the process. People not experienced enough to check on the details of a promo before walking into it hardly have the self-discipline to just walk out of a casino without playing something. SOME disgruntled people may have just walked, but not many.

    Win-win for Hooters.

  3. #23
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Bottom line on any promotion is, regardless how deceptive or player-friendly or whatever it may be, it is the player's responsibility to know WTF they are doing. My guess is Dan didn't until he learned the facts at the slot club, in which case he should have just walked away.

    That promo likely reeled in a lot of new sign-ups, which was exactly the reason for it. And while most people would have been unpleasantly surprised and while very few would ever admit to it publicly, many of those also probably lost some of their own money playing on their new cards in the process. People not experienced enough to check on the details of a promo before walking into it hardly have the self-discipline to just walk out of a casino without playing something. SOME disgruntled people may have just walked, but not many.

    Win-win for Hooters.
    I actually predicted that Rob would show up here and post something stupid, attempting to defend that awful Hooters promo.

    Glad he didn't disappoint.

    Rob, this wasn't a matter of me "not knowing what I was doing". In 2008, $100 loss-rebate freeplay offers (or ones even better than that) were SUPER COMMON at Vegas casinos upon new card signup.

    So when I saw the one advertised in huge print on the side of Hooters, I had no reason to believe it wasn't legit.

    This was NOT $100 freeplay. I'm not saying it just wasn't unrestricted. It simply wasn't $100 freeplay as they advertised. The "$100" part was completely phony, because it translated into phony credits which could not be cashed out, and could not be used to do anything but win $50 (and even that was a low chance).

    Rob, let's say I challenged your long-touted "strategies" in VP, and offered to give you "$1000 freeplay" to prove it.

    If you showed up to do the freeplay, and I directed you to a machine where I told you that you couldn't cash out any of your winnings on the $1000, but that I'd simply give you $50 if you managed to run it up to $17,000, you'd be furious. You'd tell me that I misled you and wasted your time, and you'd be right.

    There might even have been violation of some consumer law here, but I know that Hooters wasn't violating NV Gaming laws because the promo was free.

    Anyone who thinks that Hooters promo was okay is a chump and must get taken advantage of all the time.

    You should always use "Dan Druff's Ripoff Rule" to figure out if you are being cheated/misled/scammed:

    If a business does not give you the product or service you were expecting, and if at least 67% of people would have been misled/confused in a similar way, then you were being intentionally tricked, and the business did something shady.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  4. #24
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Bottom line on any promotion is, regardless how deceptive or player-friendly or whatever it may be, it is the player's responsibility to know WTF they are doing. My guess is Dan didn't until he learned the facts at the slot club, in which case he should have just walked away.

    That promo likely reeled in a lot of new sign-ups, which was exactly the reason for it. And while most people would have been unpleasantly surprised and while very few would ever admit to it publicly, many of those also probably lost some of their own money playing on their new cards in the process. People not experienced enough to check on the details of a promo before walking into it hardly have the self-discipline to just walk out of a casino without playing something. SOME disgruntled people may have just walked, but not many.

    Win-win for Hooters.
    I actually predicted that Rob would show up here and post something stupid, attempting to defend that awful Hooters promo.

    Glad he didn't disappoint.

    Rob, this wasn't a matter of me "not knowing what I was doing". In 2008, $100 loss-rebate freeplay offers (or ones even better than that) were SUPER COMMON at Vegas casinos upon new card signup.

    So when I saw the one advertised in huge print on the side of Hooters, I had no reason to believe it wasn't legit.

    This was NOT $100 freeplay. I'm not saying it just wasn't unrestricted. It simply wasn't $100 freeplay as they advertised. The "$100" part was completely phony, because it translated into phony credits which could not be cashed out, and could not be used to do anything but win $50 (and even that was a low chance).

    Rob, let's say I challenged your long-touted "strategies" in VP, and offered to give you "$1000 freeplay" to prove it.

    If you showed up to do the freeplay, and I directed you to a machine where I told you that you couldn't cash out any of your winnings on the $1000, but that I'd simply give you $50 if you managed to run it up to $17,000, you'd be furious. You'd tell me that I misled you and wasted your time, and you'd be right.

    There might even have been violation of some consumer law here, but I know that Hooters wasn't violating NV Gaming laws because the promo was free.

    Anyone who thinks that Hooters promo was okay is a chump and must get taken advantage of all the time.

    You should always use "Dan Druff's Ripoff Rule" to figure out if you are being cheated/misled/scammed:

    If a business does not give you the product or service you were expecting, and if at least 67% of people would have been misled/confused in a similar way, then you were being intentionally tricked, and the business did something shady.
    Actually Rob was 100% correct here. Hurts me to say it but this is 100% on you.

    Hopefully you had a cheap beer and overpriced wings to make the day better.

    You lived.

    PS, your “ Ripoff Rule” is common sense for anyone with common sense above a Retard Level.

    Of wait, this site is living off a retard.

  5. #25
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Bottom line on any promotion is, regardless how deceptive or player-friendly or whatever it may be, it is the player's responsibility to know WTF they are doing. My guess is Dan didn't until he learned the facts at the slot club, in which case he should have just walked away.

    That promo likely reeled in a lot of new sign-ups, which was exactly the reason for it. And while most people would have been unpleasantly surprised and while very few would ever admit to it publicly, many of those also probably lost some of their own money playing on their new cards in the process. People not experienced enough to check on the details of a promo before walking into it hardly have the self-discipline to just walk out of a casino without playing something. SOME disgruntled people may have just walked, but not many.

    Win-win for Hooters.
    I actually predicted that Rob would show up here and post something stupid, attempting to defend that awful Hooters promo.

    Glad he didn't disappoint.

    Rob, this wasn't a matter of me "not knowing what I was doing". In 2008, $100 loss-rebate freeplay offers (or ones even better than that) were SUPER COMMON at Vegas casinos upon new card signup.

    So when I saw the one advertised in huge print on the side of Hooters, I had no reason to believe it wasn't legit.

    This was NOT $100 freeplay. I'm not saying it just wasn't unrestricted. It simply wasn't $100 freeplay as they advertised. The "$100" part was completely phony, because it translated into phony credits which could not be cashed out, and could not be used to do anything but win $50 (and even that was a low chance).

    Rob, let's say I challenged your long-touted "strategies" in VP, and offered to give you "$1000 freeplay" to prove it.

    If you showed up to do the freeplay, and I directed you to a machine where I told you that you couldn't cash out any of your winnings on the $1000, but that I'd simply give you $50 if you managed to run it up to $17,000, you'd be furious. You'd tell me that I misled you and wasted your time, and you'd be right.

    There might even have been violation of some consumer law here, but I know that Hooters wasn't violating NV Gaming laws because the promo was free.

    Anyone who thinks that Hooters promo was okay is a chump and must get taken advantage of all the time.

    You should always use "Dan Druff's Ripoff Rule" to figure out if you are being cheated/misled/scammed:

    If a business does not give you the product or service you were expecting, and if at least 67% of people would have been misled/confused in a similar way, then you were being intentionally tricked, and the business did something shady.
    Sure seems like you've been embarrassed and are trying really hard to wiggle your way out of it.

    All that wordsmithing failed to address the most important issue: once the two of you were told the "bad depressing news" at the Hooters slot club, you found yourselves unable to just give them back your cards and walk away. That's what you should have done, and that's what anyone who is in control of what they do and how they do it would have done.

    So who's the stupid one here?

  6. #26
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post

    Sure seems like you've been embarrassed and are trying really hard to wiggle your way out of it.

    All that wordsmithing failed to address the most important issue: once the two of you were told the "bad depressing news" at the Hooters slot club, you found yourselves unable to just give them back your cards and walk away. That's what you should have done, and that's what anyone who is in control of what they do and how they do it would have done.

    So who's the stupid one here?
    I am not sure why you are going after Dan Druff on this. Dan sharing his experience is simply a microcosm of what that promotion was. In general it turned players off and created more negative vibe and feelings than good. And we know this how? Because this promotion which was exactly the same at both these properties (Hooters and Casino Royale) have been ditched. They weren't generating what they were designed to do....period.

    There is no guess work in this when you have the benefit of hindsight. These promotions have a track record. They know exactly how different promotions and actions stack up against other promotions and actions in terms of results and the desired goal of bringing repeat customers in. And these two promotions gone, tells you they did not achieve the desired goal. And all the complaints against them, tells you that no only did they fall short of the desired goal, but probably did just the opposite of their intent....turned players off to that casino.

    We don't have to guess. These promotions are gone. And you defending these promotions which obviously failed clearly shows who the stupid one is here, Rob Singer.

  7. #27
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Bottom line on any promotion is, regardless how deceptive or player-friendly or whatever it may be, it is the player's responsibility to know WTF they are doing. My guess is Dan didn't until he learned the facts at the slot club, in which case he should have just walked away.

    That promo likely reeled in a lot of new sign-ups, which was exactly the reason for it. And while most people would have been unpleasantly surprised and while very few would ever admit to it publicly, many of those also probably lost some of their own money playing on their new cards in the process. People not experienced enough to check on the details of a promo before walking into it hardly have the self-discipline to just walk out of a casino without playing something. SOME disgruntled people may have just walked, but not many.

    Win-win for Hooters.
    I actually predicted that Rob would show up here and post something stupid, attempting to defend that awful Hooters promo.

    Glad he didn't disappoint.

    Rob, this wasn't a matter of me "not knowing what I was doing". In 2008, $100 loss-rebate freeplay offers (or ones even better than that) were SUPER COMMON at Vegas casinos upon new card signup.

    So when I saw the one advertised in huge print on the side of Hooters, I had no reason to believe it wasn't legit.

    This was NOT $100 freeplay. I'm not saying it just wasn't unrestricted. It simply wasn't $100 freeplay as they advertised. The "$100" part was completely phony, because it translated into phony credits which could not be cashed out, and could not be used to do anything but win $50 (and even that was a low chance).

    Rob, let's say I challenged your long-touted "strategies" in VP, and offered to give you "$1000 freeplay" to prove it.

    If you showed up to do the freeplay, and I directed you to a machine where I told you that you couldn't cash out any of your winnings on the $1000, but that I'd simply give you $50 if you managed to run it up to $17,000, you'd be furious. You'd tell me that I misled you and wasted your time, and you'd be right.

    There might even have been violation of some consumer law here, but I know that Hooters wasn't violating NV Gaming laws because the promo was free.

    Anyone who thinks that Hooters promo was okay is a chump and must get taken advantage of all the time.

    You should always use "Dan Druff's Ripoff Rule" to figure out if you are being cheated/misled/scammed:

    If a business does not give you the product or service you were expecting, and if at least 67% of people would have been misled/confused in a similar way, then you were being intentionally tricked, and the business did something shady.
    Sure seems like you've been embarrassed and are trying really hard to wiggle your way out of it.

    All that wordsmithing failed to address the most important issue: once the two of you were told the "bad depressing news" at the Hooters slot club, you found yourselves unable to just give them back your cards and walk away. That's what you should have done, and that's what anyone who is in control of what they do and how they do it would have done.

    So who's the stupid one here?
    It is clear that the promotion is misleading at best. No one says it isn't on the player to know what they are doing. You're making a total strawman.

    When it is just a free handout and all you are doing is giving up your time, it doesn't really make sense to spend all the time to learn exactly what you're getting. You just sign-up and see. Anyone with an analytical background will understand this. You analyze what is worth seriously analyzing. From what i understand reading on here, Mr Singer, you lack the ability to do that sort of thing.

    I mean, do you really expect the Hooters is going to give you the RTP on their machines and enough info to figure out if it would be worth the time? You're not buying anything. There is no real contract here. The consumer gives up nothing. How do we even know what sort of information was presented ? I don't even remember the $100 free slot-play. I just remember hitting a button over and over thinking how fuckin' stupid this is. Kinda a joke, kinda annoying sort of thing.

    You guys have made a completely different point. I'm not claiming that I lost anything but my time and it soured me at the time. You guys act like Druff and myself are still upset at how we were done wrong when it is more of a LOL gambling story. Thats it.

    Bottom line - Rob, you're still a retard.

  8. #28
    Rob appears to have the same short-sightedness as these business school graduates that now run casinos instead of real casino people that used to.

    Here is an example of what I am talking about. Some MBA business school type looks at the revenue, lets say blackjack and he says if we lower the payout to 6:5 we bump revenue by 15% based on current numbers. But they fail to look longterm. So they lower payout to 6:5. for the first few months revenue does spike until some player get fed up. Some, not all. But after a few months, maybe a year, when some players have done the math and others haven't bothered doing the math, but just recognize they don't win like they used to, revenue begins to drop.

    So they lose 20% of their business. And now that bump is 15% higher of 20% less. That is not a winning formula. Think slightly bigger piece of a much smaller pie.

    Same exact thing occurred with VP pay tables. These clowns only look short-term. The real casino type people that used to run casinos always looked longterm. They knew it was about repeat customers. Bringing people back again, and again and again. Not some short-term bump leading to a much bigger longterm decline.

  9. #29
    Here's another analogy. These pencil pushing geeks decide to raise the house edge on whatever game, saying it will increase revenue xx%. But that analogy is based on the same number of people playing. They don't consider the longterm effect that it will drive some customers away.

    So the customer base shrinks. Now they have to squeeze the smaller customer base even more. Increase the house edge, lower pay tables, maybe add a 3rd zero to roulette. And the customer base will shrink even more. Soon we will have roulette with 6 zeros.

    There is a reason the old casino guys that ran the casinos didn't change things all that much, only minor tweeks and that is the model worked. For decades and decades it worked. You give customers a little something, treat them well and they gladly lose much more and come back again and again to lose. But if you start squeezing harder and harder, you lose them for good. I guess they didn't teach that in business school.

  10. #30
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Here's another analogy. These pencil pushing geeks decide to raise the house edge on whatever game, saying it will increase revenue xx%. But that analogy is based on the same number of people playing. They don't consider the longterm effect that it will drive some customers away.

    So the customer base shrinks. Now they have to squeeze the smaller customer base even more. Increase the house edge, lower pay tables, maybe add a 3rd zero to roulette. And the customer base will shrink even more. Soon we will have roulette with 6 zeros.

    There is a reason the old casino guys that ran the casinos didn't change things all that much, only minor tweeks and that is the model worked. For decades and decades it worked. You give customers a little something, treat them well and they gladly lose much more and come back again and again to lose. But if you start squeezing harder and harder, you lose them for good. I guess they didn't teach that in business school.
    A lot of this the same problem repeated through-out corporations. The executive management gets paid on short-term results. These short-term results may be a good thing, or they might be damaging but by the time the damage is shown, the executives have been paid.

    I mean, maybe these business guys know better and still don't give a crap. They have little ownership in the company. They see it as a thing that provides a paycheck. Same basic pattern repeated IMO. They can always move down the road to the next job given to them by their buddies.

  11. #31
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Bottom line on any promotion is, regardless how deceptive or player-friendly or whatever it may be, it is the player's responsibility to know WTF they are doing. My guess is Dan didn't until he learned the facts at the slot club, in which case he should have just walked away.

    That promo likely reeled in a lot of new sign-ups, which was exactly the reason for it. And while most people would have been unpleasantly surprised and while very few would ever admit to it publicly, many of those also probably lost some of their own money playing on their new cards in the process. People not experienced enough to check on the details of a promo before walking into it hardly have the self-discipline to just walk out of a casino without playing something. SOME disgruntled people may have just walked, but not many.

    Win-win for Hooters.
    I actually predicted that Rob would show up here and post something stupid, attempting to defend that awful Hooters promo.

    Glad he didn't disappoint.

    Rob, this wasn't a matter of me "not knowing what I was doing". In 2008, $100 loss-rebate freeplay offers (or ones even better than that) were SUPER COMMON at Vegas casinos upon new card signup.

    So when I saw the one advertised in huge print on the side of Hooters, I had no reason to believe it wasn't legit.

    This was NOT $100 freeplay. I'm not saying it just wasn't unrestricted. It simply wasn't $100 freeplay as they advertised. The "$100" part was completely phony, because it translated into phony credits which could not be cashed out, and could not be used to do anything but win $50 (and even that was a low chance).

    Rob, let's say I challenged your long-touted "strategies" in VP, and offered to give you "$1000 freeplay" to prove it.

    If you showed up to do the freeplay, and I directed you to a machine where I told you that you couldn't cash out any of your winnings on the $1000, but that I'd simply give you $50 if you managed to run it up to $17,000, you'd be furious. You'd tell me that I misled you and wasted your time, and you'd be right.

    There might even have been violation of some consumer law here, but I know that Hooters wasn't violating NV Gaming laws because the promo was free.

    Anyone who thinks that Hooters promo was okay is a chump and must get taken advantage of all the time.

    You should always use "Dan Druff's Ripoff Rule" to figure out if you are being cheated/misled/scammed:

    If a business does not give you the product or service you were expecting, and if at least 67% of people would have been misled/confused in a similar way, then you were being intentionally tricked, and the business did something shady.
    Sure seems like you've been embarrassed and are trying really hard to wiggle your way out of it.

    All that wordsmithing failed to address the most important issue: once the two of you were told the "bad depressing news" at the Hooters slot club, you found yourselves unable to just give them back your cards and walk away. That's what you should have done, and that's what anyone who is in control of what they do and how they do it would have done.

    So who's the stupid one here?

    Here's what I love about "Singer." He waxes eloquent as a pseudo-expert regarding something he knows nothing about. Then he accuses Dan of "wordsmithing" -- whatever the hell that is supposed to be -- while using quotations to suggest Dan said something directly that he never said. All the while, "Singer" misses the key elements of the Hooters promo, undoubtedly because he never played it or witnessed it.

    So here we go.

    First of all, I did the promo way back when. So I was there. I actually saw and experienced it. It was running, I think, about the same time that the Maxim incarnation did a legit promo. But before commenting, let me point to "Singer" saying, referring to Dan Druff's experience, that "once the two of you were told the 'bad depressing news' at the Hooters slot club" is an attempt to fictionalize and spin what Dan said. Nobody at the slot club told me anything about the promo. I was directed to the slot machine roped off area and was told that the person in charge there would explain it all. So leaving the slot club, I was still expecting free play.

    Thus, to repeat, "Singer" was "wordsmithing" what Dan wrote. "Singer" was making shit up, in other words.

    Back to the promo. Upon being directed to the slot machines, I saw there was a short line. I was there by myself. I had about a 10-minute wait, as it turned out. It was evident to me, as I stood in line, that it wasn't legit. It reminded me of the old Riviera gig where the street hawkers would get you to come inside with some "slot play." Anyway, had I been with someone, I would have walked away, but I was alone, so I figured I'd do the experience since I was there. If it had been football season, I would have walked -- can't waste 20-30 minutes during football season.

    Anyway, once I stepped to the machine area, the person explained the rules, which, as figured, were crap. I couldn't believe how misguided the promo was, as it wasted an enormous amount of people's time, and there was a line. People could have been doing other things -- eating, gambling, leaving. Historically, promos like this take no more than five or ten minutes of an individual's time -- wasting the sign-up's time does neither the casino nor the new sign-up any favors.

    I played the slot machine. I had decided I'd walk away after 15 minutes, no matter what, and it took about that long for me to tap out the credits. Other people were there considerably longer. It was bizarre. Some folks played a half hour or more. I don't think management had thought the thing through.

    So that's the reality of it. There was no free play explanation at the slot club -- when asked, they just said they didn't know and pointed you to the person in charge of the slot machines. There was no written summary anywhere in view.

  12. #32
    I wanted to add two things, being an upstanding citizen and all:

    1) What I reported above was my single experience. Obviously, if "Singer" or anyone had a different experience, whereby the slot club told you the rules immediately or a print version was sitting there on the table, then that experience was not mine.

    2) There seem to be a couple of patterns here. First, I do not post unless correcting some brain dead or snarky post from "Singer" aimed at someone else. I established that awhile back. Second, "Singer" has a habit of promoting himself as expert regarding things he wasn't present for and didn't actually do. There's quite a bit of history and resonance regarding that, so believers beware. This was another example. He filled in blanks regarding what Dan and kewlJ had reported, and he filled them in inaccurately to boost his own take on things. The only reason he got caught is because someone was there who occasionally surveys this forum (me) who understood what he was trying to pull. He fabricated the part about Dan learning the details at the slot club, and he presented the line in quotations, ostensibly from Dan. Putting specific lines in quotations can be defended by "Singer" as not directly quoting Dan, but as "Singer" tipping people off that what was in quotes wasn't really true. But he's not clear on that, so it's misleading, and the majority of readers would not take it that way. It's an old ploy that fits the bill of "wordsmithing."

    In conclusion, Dan, you might want to file that curious and dishonest use of quotes to create the impression of a direct quote while legally getting away with an explanation of "I was tipping people off that it doesn't mean what it says." File it as another dishonest trickeration that would mislead 67% of people or more. And file this example away as another case of "Singer" proclaiming pseudo-expertise regarding something he hadn't seen or done.

    Believers beware. And, like Fox Mulder, I want to believe (the glitch story) because it makes "Singer" more toxic than previously. Decades of lying to thousands of readers in the service of self ain't exactly journalistic integrity. "Singer" without the glitch story had more integrity.
    Last edited by redietz; 08-26-2019 at 03:38 AM.

  13. #33
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    I actually predicted that Rob would show up here and post something stupid, attempting to defend that awful Hooters promo.

    Glad he didn't disappoint.

    Rob, this wasn't a matter of me "not knowing what I was doing". In 2008, $100 loss-rebate freeplay offers (or ones even better than that) were SUPER COMMON at Vegas casinos upon new card signup.

    So when I saw the one advertised in huge print on the side of Hooters, I had no reason to believe it wasn't legit.

    This was NOT $100 freeplay. I'm not saying it just wasn't unrestricted. It simply wasn't $100 freeplay as they advertised. The "$100" part was completely phony, because it translated into phony credits which could not be cashed out, and could not be used to do anything but win $50 (and even that was a low chance).

    Rob, let's say I challenged your long-touted "strategies" in VP, and offered to give you "$1000 freeplay" to prove it.

    If you showed up to do the freeplay, and I directed you to a machine where I told you that you couldn't cash out any of your winnings on the $1000, but that I'd simply give you $50 if you managed to run it up to $17,000, you'd be furious. You'd tell me that I misled you and wasted your time, and you'd be right.

    There might even have been violation of some consumer law here, but I know that Hooters wasn't violating NV Gaming laws because the promo was free.

    Anyone who thinks that Hooters promo was okay is a chump and must get taken advantage of all the time.

    You should always use "Dan Druff's Ripoff Rule" to figure out if you are being cheated/misled/scammed:

    If a business does not give you the product or service you were expecting, and if at least 67% of people would have been misled/confused in a similar way, then you were being intentionally tricked, and the business did something shady.
    Sure seems like you've been embarrassed and are trying really hard to wiggle your way out of it.

    All that wordsmithing failed to address the most important issue: once the two of you were told the "bad depressing news" at the Hooters slot club, you found yourselves unable to just give them back your cards and walk away. That's what you should have done, and that's what anyone who is in control of what they do and how they do it would have done.

    So who's the stupid one here?

    Here's what I love about "Singer." He waxes eloquent as a pseudo-expert regarding something he knows nothing about. Then he accuses Dan of "wordsmithing" -- whatever the hell that is supposed to be -- while using quotations to suggest Dan said something directly that he never said. All the while, "Singer" misses the key elements of the Hooters promo, undoubtedly because he never played it or witnessed it.

    So here we go.

    First of all, I did the promo way back when. So I was there. I actually saw and experienced it. It was running, I think, about the same time that the Maxim incarnation did a legit promo. But before commenting, let me point to "Singer" saying, referring to Dan Druff's experience, that "once the two of you were told the 'bad depressing news' at the Hooters slot club" is an attempt to fictionalize and spin what Dan said. Nobody at the slot club told me anything about the promo. I was directed to the slot machine roped off area and was told that the person in charge there would explain it all. So leaving the slot club, I was still expecting free play.

    Thus, to repeat, "Singer" was "wordsmithing" what Dan wrote. "Singer" was making shit up, in other words.

    Back to the promo. Upon being directed to the slot machines, I saw there was a short line. I was there by myself. I had about a 10-minute wait, as it turned out. It was evident to me, as I stood in line, that it wasn't legit. It reminded me of the old Riviera gig where the street hawkers would get you to come inside with some "slot play." Anyway, had I been with someone, I would have walked away, but I was alone, so I figured I'd do the experience since I was there. If it had been football season, I would have walked -- can't waste 20-30 minutes during football season.

    Anyway, once I stepped to the machine area, the person explained the rules, which, as figured, were crap. I couldn't believe how misguided the promo was, as it wasted an enormous amount of people's time, and there was a line. People could have been doing other things -- eating, gambling, leaving. Historically, promos like this take no more than five or ten minutes of an individual's time -- wasting the sign-up's time does neither the casino nor the new sign-up any favors.

    I played the slot machine. I had decided I'd walk away after 15 minutes, no matter what, and it took about that long for me to tap out the credits. Other people were there considerably longer. It was bizarre. Some folks played a half hour or more. I don't think management had thought the thing through.

    So that's the reality of it. There was no free play explanation at the slot club -- when asked, they just said they didn't know and pointed you to the person in charge of the slot machines. There was no written summary anywhere in view.
    What an idiot.

    I expect you were too stupid to ask about the details when you signed up. Then you were too embarrassed to just walk away when you learned you'd been had. You...and Dan along with many others...were made fools of, and you were much too weak to do anything about it. Now, you whine.

    You could have said that in one quick, simple post. We already understand how weird you are.

  14. #34

  15. #35
    Maybe with all their other locations they can cross-promote this vegas getaway and actually make it work.

  16. #36
    Having just sold for $53 million in 2015 that's making for a nice profit for the last investment group. Maybe the OYO company got a negative interest rate loan....lol

  17. #37

  18. #38
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post

    Sure seems like you've been embarrassed and are trying really hard to wiggle your way out of it.

    All that wordsmithing failed to address the most important issue: once the two of you were told the "bad depressing news" at the Hooters slot club, you found yourselves unable to just give them back your cards and walk away. That's what you should have done, and that's what anyone who is in control of what they do and how they do it would have done.

    So who's the stupid one here?
    I am not sure why you are going after Dan Druff on this. Dan sharing his experience is simply a microcosm of what that promotion was. In general it turned players off and created more negative vibe and feelings than good. And we know this how? Because this promotion which was exactly the same at both these properties (Hooters and Casino Royale) have been ditched. They weren't generating what they were designed to do....period.

    There is no guess work in this when you have the benefit of hindsight. These promotions have a track record. They know exactly how different promotions and actions stack up against other promotions and actions in terms of results and the desired goal of bringing repeat customers in. And these two promotions gone, tells you they did not achieve the desired goal. And all the complaints against them, tells you that no only did they fall short of the desired goal, but probably did just the opposite of their intent....turned players off to that casino.

    We don't have to guess. These promotions are gone. And you defending these promotions which obviously failed clearly shows who the stupid one is here, Rob Singer.
    Just because a place ditches a promotionthat doesn't mean it didn't work well. IIRC they both lasted a long time. Somtime things just change. I actually thought the one at Casino Royal was fairly popular. Perhaps people did have to play for a long time but what about all the free cocktails they got while playing? For fuck sakes, people play online slots for fun and no chance to win anything at all.

  19. #39
    So I don't know who this OYO company is. 2 different articles I have read says an India based low budget hotel chain that has recently expanded into the US with 150 properties in the US. Under what name are the hotels in the US? OYO hotel? Never heard of it?

    Now the term "low budget hotel" also doesn't sound very appealing. Are we talking about a Motel 6 or travel lodge type outfit (quality, but obviously smaller), now running a casino on/just off the strip? That's weird. Even if it is a smaller casino.

    So anyway, whenever these acquisitions go down, my first hope is maybe more favorable/playable blackjack conditions, because Hooters has had nothing playable (blackjack wise) for a while now. And that does occasionally occur when a casino changes hands. When Fitzgerald's (Fitz) because "The D" downtown, blackjack rules/conditions changed for the better. Fitz was a mix of 6:5 and 3:2, and D went back to all 3:2. A couple others as well, but are not coming to mind right now. It's rare but it happens.

    Unfortunately in this case, both articles mention the company that has been running Hooters casinos will remain running the new company's casino operation, so likely no change/improvement in this case, sadly.

  20. #40
    OYO? WTF is that?

    I can't imagine this being successful.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. They should have sold
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-05-2018, 07:02 AM
  2. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 08-24-2014, 11:32 AM
  3. Why the hotel at Rincon is sold out this weekend
    By Alan Mendelson in forum California/Western US Casinos
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-21-2014, 08:03 PM
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-07-2013, 01:21 PM
  5. Scrap silver sold from my belt
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Money, Shopping, Real Estate, Investing
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-10-2013, 09:56 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
  •