Casinoboss Answers Your Questions: Part IV

My gosh people! Add the two numbers together and make a decision.

While I agree with you, Boiler, it's more a display and ease of comparison issue in my opinion. Airlines were forced to display the total cost on searches on their websites and Stubhub has also went to a "price you pay is the price you see" model. I think there would be less complaining about resort fees if search engines like Expedia, Orbitz, Priceline, and the resort websites displayed a "price you pay is price you see" model.

It was the Federal Government that recently forced airline ticket prices to be transparent, with taxes and fees all rolled into the bottom line price.

Unfortunately, the State of Nevada doesn't enjoy the sort of consumer-friendly leadership that the Federal Government does.

OMG.... Chilly's alive !!

My two cents when it comes to resort fees. I agree with Boiler on this one. Having said that, I can handle a $120.00 room rate better than a $100.00 a room with a $20.00 resort fee. With me it is just a mental thing. I know it is totally illogical but I don't mind spending $120.00 for a room I want but I hate spending that extra $20.00 for crap I don't want. On top of that you are not given the option to opt out of the water, internet, gym etc. Then they insult your intelligence by saying it is for all these extra goodies that I couldn't care less about.

It reminds me of when you see the term convenience fee. I remember seeing that term one time when I booked something online and I said convenient for who, I did all of the work.

FWIW, Nevada's regulation actually makes life very easy for consumers and operators alike compared to many other states. Ask anyone who's gambled in:

Missouri (https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2008/11/03/daily34.html?page=all - since repealed)

Iowa (https://qctimes.com/news/local/ask-the-times/iowa-casinos-limit-drinking-while-gambling/article_e971c23a-5eb9-11de-a685-001cc4c03286.html)

Colorado (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Amendment_50)

Etc.

And that's just from the consumer side. I know many of my colleagues who refuse to work in Missouri or New Jersey because of how over-the-top their regulatory processes area (stuff that consumers never see).

Colorado is quite restrictive!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Amendment_50

Reminds me of Aruba. The casino closes down @ 10 PM!

Amendment 50 passed in 2008, and the new regulations went into affect July 1, 2009. There are now casinos open 24/7, max bet was raised to $100.00, and table games were expanded to include craps and roulette.

Most places are just to ashamed to tell you the total price---almost like buying a car after all is added you need another loan to make the payments.

casinoboss,

You're quoting me, but not addressing any point I made.

The thread and I are discussing add-on fees, like the resort fees almost universally charged by Nevada casino hotels. The State of Nevada hasn't put a stop to the practice, and rightly or wrongly a lot of people are mad.

Compare Nevada's inaction on that front to the action by the Federal Government, which recently prohibited the airlines' practice of promoting one ticket price, then adding on tons of hidden, mandatory surcharges like taxes, fees, and PFCs.

Yes, the State of Nevada has wisely chosen to keep casinos free to innovate by keeping the regs loose.

But in the area of resort fees, Nevada has been too permissive, and has unnecessarily angered a lot of visitors. It'd be better for everyone if casinos and those who market their rooms were forced to combine all such mandatory surcharges into a single, advertised price.

Most casino operators who've spoken on the subject say they'd like to get rid of resort fees but can't for competitive reasons. That's when the government should step in and correct this failure of the market that's hurting Nevada.