Slate article about whether or not Vegas is "dead"

[Dan Druff]

Here's the link without a paywall: https://archive.ph/KZDaS

The article makes some good points, and in the middle you can find an interview with John and Kristina Mehaffey, regarding the degraded odds of games. The article does note that casual gamblers seem to be too stupid to care, which is sadly true. However, it does kind of explain (though not in a direct way) that even though people don't realize they're playing worse games, they do see how quickly their money vanishes, and it's not fun for them.

There are some stupid parts of the article, such as interviews with a street "showgirl" and a "timeshare hawker", both of whom lament times being tough. The showgirl is described as "charging $60 per photo", but doesn't tell the truth that this is a hidden price, and tourists are coerced into paying that after taking a picture with them, often with threats of violence. The timeshare hawker isn't just an innocent saleswoman, but rather one who begins a process of tricking mostly lower-middle-class people into a "great investment" which is a borderline scam.

Those types of people should be at minimum evicted from the strip, and ideally in jail. We shouldn't lament their tough times with fewer suckers on the streets.

There's also the complaint about rooms being too expensive, which simply doesn't hold water. Las Vegas actually has CHEAPER rooms than most big cities, especially during the week. The room costs aren't the problem. It's everything else, especially the food prices and the horrible-odds games.

But aside from those parts, the article isn't bad. Give it a read and let me know what you think.

[Don Perignom]

But aside from those parts, the article isn't bad.

It's a numerical analysis written by a liberal arts idiot.

Example:

John told me that Vegas initially ratcheted up its minimums during the pandemic in reaction to the crunch of COVID-era gambling. Social-distancing mandates limited the number of players that could gather at casino tables, so operators made up the difference in scale—squeezing more money out of the few gamblers risking infection to play. It is less clear why those juiced wagers stuck around once the coronavirus receded, outside of the obvious: Gamblers are willing to pay them.

"We have no idea why the minimums stayed up."

[DGenBen]

I tried but I could only get about halfway through this article.

What an awful writer. Writing things like “festooning a gauche” & “chthonic”

A guy trying to show off how smart he is by overusing fancy words that no one uses.

I did agree with the sentiment of the first half of the article though once you break through the ridiculous language, but good lord I couldn’t take it anymore.

The writer’s name is Luke Winkie, & boy does he sound like a “Luke Winkie”

[MDawg]

even though people don't realize they're playing worse games

There is still public 3:2 double deck blackjack including with DAS and S17, and you may set up a private game like that if you have enough clout. Baccarat is the same as it has always been, including for the practically 100% of people who would not know how to set it up for an advantage. Has craps changed at all? I don't play it so I would not know, but I assume it is the same as always.

[kewlJ]

There is still public 3:2 double deck blackjack including with DAS and S17, and you may set up a private game like that if you have enough clout.

Yeah because THAT is what we are talking about here. Private games and having enough "clout". Dan Druff specifically commented on casual gamblers and you responded with this.

Way back when I was playing Atlantic City and living in Phila, I used to take the train to AC. One day returning home on the train, there were two older women (from Baltimore based on their conversation). They were discussing how they used to win some trips, and now they NEVER had a winning trip. They specifically mentioned how their money doesn't even last as long.

These women knew nothing about the odds or that casinos had tightened up their slot machines. All they knew is their money didn't last as long and they rarely had a winning trip like they used to. Once people start to realize that and feel that way, then there in no enjoyment to them playing and they stop or make less frequent trips. It is a case of greed by casinos. They are not content to have a reasonable edge on EVERY game, they have to squeeze and drive normal recreational customers away. That leaves them with a smaller customer base that they then have to squeeze even harder. Until they squeeze themselves right out of business.

As for 3-2 public double deck blackjack on the strip. Those games are "counter-trap". They are watched closely (hawked) and any signs of card counting or hole-carding and the player is backed off or 86ed. Sometimes a player is just varying bets a bit (not with the count) and they are backed off. The ONLY players "allowed" to play those games are losing players. They don't even want players that just play a good basic strategy game (still -EV).

They might as well hang a sign saying only losing and system players allowed. Which of course is why Turtle is welcome.

[kewlJ]

Las Vegas made 2 mistakes in the last 20-25 years, IMO. The first wasn't specific to Las Vegas, but occurred throughout the gambling industry. And that was to put people in charge with generic business degrees, instead of the people that KNEW the gambling business. These pencil pusher types don't understand gambling business. They cut corners and make cuts, including reduces odds, paytables, ect that may show an increase short-term, but longer-term turn off and drive away the actual gambling clientel. They are then left trying to squeeze more money out of a smaller customer base.

The second mistake is specific to Las Vegas. Someone, probably these same business school geniuses decided that Las Vegas shouldn't be what it has always been about.....GAMBLING. Instead the bulk of revenue should come from shopping and restaurants, and night clubs. These things should only exist to supplement the main industry, which was always gambling.

If people want to go shopping they can do that anywhere. If people want to go clubbing, they can do that in any major city. What made Las Vegas special, was GAMBLING!

[smurgerburger]

Pretty sure the diversification into non-gaming revenue sources has been highly successful.

[kewlJ]

Pretty sure the diversification into non-gaming revenue sources has been highly successful.

Then why are there about a million stories involving tourism decline, revenue decline, hotel occupancy declines over the last 10 years?

ANY data you look at shows decline.

And anyone that lives and plays here regularly doesn't even need to see this data to know, it ain't the way it used to be just 8-10-12 years ago.

[DGenBen]

Las Vegas made 2 mistakes in the last 20-25 years, IMO. The first wasn't specific to Las Vegas, but occurred throughout the gambling industry. And that was to put people in charge with generic business degrees, instead of the people that KNEW the gambling business. These pencil pusher types don't understand gambling business. They cut corners and make cuts, including reduces odds, paytables, ect that may show an increase short-term, but longer-term turn off and drive away the actual gambling clientel. They are then left trying to squeeze more money out of a smaller customer base.

The second mistake is specific to Las Vegas. Someone, probably these same business school geniuses decided that Las Vegas shouldn't be what it has always been about.....GAMBLING. Instead the bulk of revenue should come from shopping and restaurants, and night clubs. These things should only exist to supplement the main industry, which was always gambling.

If people want to go shopping they can do that anywhere. If people want to go clubbing, they can do that in any major city. What made Las VegasMBA special, was GAMBLING!

What you’re describing is the same thing that happened to Boeing.

They were always run by engineers until they merged with McDonald Douglas, & as soon as the MBAs started running things, they killed the company by letting safety & quality slip.

[accountinquestion]

MBAs are the nut low on late stage capitalism

[DGenBen]

MBAs are the nut low on late stage capitalism

Something I find kind of interesting about it, is the more of a BS product you have the more MBAs can get away with it.

Banks, Insurance, Crypto, Stocks, etc & even gambling to a big extent since all it really is is entertainment.

But once you have a tangible real product like airplanes & when you start cutting corners they fall out of the sky it’s a whole different ball game,

[smurgerburger]

Pretty sure the diversification into non-gaming revenue sources has been highly successful.

Then why are there about a million stories involving tourism decline, revenue decline, hotel occupancy declines over the last 10 years?

ANY data you look at shows decline.

And anyone that lives and plays here regularly doesn't even need to see this data to know, it ain't the way it used to be just 8-10-12 years ago.

That is a recent decline from peak earnings, and is commonly attributed to excessive prices and fees.

The diversification in question began long ago. 30 years ago maybe?

[Don Perignom]

ect

What you’re describing is the same thing that happened to Boeing.

The theory as I understand is that Strip resorts are suffering due to blowback from their gouging. But how do the locals operators fit in? Afaik, Boyd and Red Rock Resorts have both been tight on promos and comps since 2020, and they seem to be doing okay.

[DGenBen]

ect

What you’re describing is the same thing that happened to Boeing.

The theory as I understand is that Strip resorts are suffering due to blowback from their gouging. But how do the locals operators fit in? Afaik, Boyd and Red Rock Resorts have both been tight on promos and comps since 2020, and they seem to be doing okay.

They can afford to be tight on their promos and comps if they are still offering the locals good games I assume.

[Don Perignom]

They can afford to be tight on their promos and comps if they are still offering the locals good games I assume.

If we had regulation that served the public interest, holds would be disclosed individually by property. But available info does support your suggestion. Here's what I get from the latest reporting for one year through 9/30/2025. These are win %s for all slot denoms combined, nonrestricted sites only:

statewide 7.16%

Clark County (breakdown below: ) 7.47
downtown 8.29
strip 7.93
North LV 7.43
Laughlin 8.22
Boulder area 6.42
Mesquite 6.59
balance of Clark County 6.50

Washoe County (Reno/Sparks) 5.47

[DGenBen]

They can afford to be tight on their promos and comps if they are still offering the locals good games I assume.

If we had regulation that served the public interest, holds would be disclosed individually by property. But available info does support your suggestion. Here's what I get from the latest reporting for one year through 9/30/2025. These are win %s for all slot denoms combined, nonrestricted sites only:

statewide 7.16%

Clark County (breakdown below: ) 7.47
downtown 8.29
strip 7.93
North LV 7.43
Laughlin 8.22
Boulder area 6.42
Mesquite 6.59
balance of Clark County 6.50

Washoe County (Reno/Sparks) 5.47

Agreed.

These holds always look better than they are since they don’t break out video poker.

Like strip at 7.93, if it was all slots and no VP it would certainly be over 10.

[MDawg]

Red Rock and GVR give me a hefty amount of automated freebies monthly, thousands in free play chips, thousands in resorts credits, and lots of free nights. The free nights don't mean much to me, but they have a requirement of staying at least one night to receive the free play chips and the resort credits, which tack onto the room folio.

Resorts credits may be used for merchandise and I can't tell you how many times I have gone in there to clean out every cologne, perfume or skincare they have, eventually you just run out of things you want.

Caesars and Resorts World Vegas have similar automated marketing campaigns. RW Vegas the offers are pretty stock, but Caesars you need a skilled host to pick and choose the best offers. For Caesars sometimes I just go in there with a friend and let her just pick up whatever she wants, they have some cool items also sunglasses. The also carry Creed cologne but I maxed out on that, which is why I let someone else just shop away these days, and my wife doesn't want most of the stuff they have any longer.

If you do have a room, especially if someone is staying in it, just have to make sure the merchandise is purchased first to eat up all the resorts credits, before any food and beverage, which someone like me would get comp'ed anyway.

Yes the numbers I receive are higher than most, but everyone who plays there (Station Casinos) gets something monthly.

[Don Perignom]

These holds always look better than they are since they don’t break out video poker.

Like strip at 7.93, if it was all slots and no VP it would certainly be over 10.

Indeed. The 1-cent denom is indicated at 10.80, on the strip. Statewide 1-cent denom is 9.13.

The majority of machines nowadays are categorized as "multi" rather than any specific denomination.

I assume the "slot" data includes any machine accepting a players card, so that would also catch video table units.

[Don Perignom]

There's also the complaint about rooms being too expensive, which simply doesn't hold water. Las Vegas actually has CHEAPER rooms than most big cities, especially during the week. The room costs aren't the problem.

Not only that, but comps and discounts are readily available for anyone willing or able to be slightly savvy.

I think resort fees have created a bad impression. They may be a smart business tactic overall, but some customers feel cheated.

[kewlJ]

The diversification in question began long ago. 30 years ago maybe?

I don't think it has been 30 years, because at least some of these things I am talking about have occurred since I have lived in Vegas which has been about half that long (16 years). Maybe we are talking about different things or different levels or phases.

But regardless of the exact time, these kind of decision often take years to see the total results. You might have a short-term period where the bottom line increases and then 10 years down the road you have lost most of those people.