why so much negativity towards the locals casinos?

The Las Vegas Review Journal has an article about the state of the locals casinos. Here is the link:

https://www.lvrj.com/business/locals-gaming-market-struggles-to-recover-120563354.html

What I found especially interesting were the readers comments below?

I admit I very, very, very rarely am in a locals casino. Played craps at Red Rock ONCE, played a few slots at Rampart waiting for a Bar Mitzvah to start ONCE, and played a little craps at the Fiesta in North Vegas ONCE, and at Sams town ONCE. but thats it-- only four "stop ins" all over the past eleven years.

but I always thought that locals casinos were better for players than the rest? The negative comments got me wondering? or do just the complainers post?

I'm pretty sure its the latter.

I dont think its a matter of opinion that North Vegas and Boulder Highway have lower table limits and better rules than the strip. The reader specifically mentions Red Rock and Rampart which may not be the most player friendly casinos in the locals' scene. But then he also mentions Sams Town which is ridiculous. You may love or hate Sams Town but it is far more player friendly than anything on the strip...and I dont think thats even debateable.

Did that person mention playing at Strip properties? Perhaps that person isn't a gambler. Perhaps they were only killing time while waiting for the event to start.
Not everyone who lives in Vegas gambles all the time.

I think the article states the truth. The locals market won't rebound until the LV economy does and that's gonna take some time. I'm with you on the comments. I would agree that the responders are predominantly negative to start with. I know my locals friends have never expressed views like this. Sure, they regret certain freebees being discontinued, but they also understand reality. You can't give the house away and still make it. In their case, the economy hasn't hurt them badly. Sue was laid off at the Riv, but they're still in decent shape. They have cut back on their casino visits, but they were heading that way before the crash.

I agree that the strip is a key to LV recovery, bit I think the glory days are gone forever. In the 90s and early 2000s, everyone wanted to try Vegas. The megaresorts, the restaurants and the shows seemed to be the draw for multitudes. I knew people that didn't understand why I would go to LV, when Reno was closer and cheaper. Afterall, a BJ table is a BJ table. The after a trip to LV, they were confirmed addicts. From this point though, I think we'll never see LV spending like it was because most everyone has taken such a large hit. It's kind of sad for me because I always loved turning people on to Vegas. They'd go down as doubters and come back believers. Those days are gone though.

Good Luck!
Ric at Joes

Slots paybacks are also better. It's posted every year, and year single year places like Boulder Highway, North Las Vegas, and downtown all have better payout percentages on slots when compared to the strip. They also have lower limits and and better rules at the tables like several people mentioned. Many of the local casinos also have very good restaurants at much cheaper prices.

Locals are different from tourists. It's that simple. Yes, the gambling and restaurant deals, etc., are better at locals' casinos. But most locals do not gamble when they can't afford it, and so many of them can't afford it today. They don't spend huge amounts of money on liquor in Strip nightclubs. They don't spend $200 on a show ticket. They don't play the bad games on the Strip. They simply stay home more when money is tight. They're not "on vacation." They live here and have to pay the rent and buy groceries. I frequent locals' casinos, but I have cut back tremendously on gambling over the last couple of years.

I agree with suecasey. They take care of the locals.
Of course I am not in Vegas, but my local casino offers me fantastic offers and comps. These are weekly offers. I can get a comped room 2 nights/wk. each month. I can bring in a new player once a month and get them a free room for 2 nights. I get upgraded to a free suite 90% of the time. I haven't paid for a meal in almost a year(since they got tables). I also get free concert tickets(to all events). I rarely go as I have to work weekends.
The last time I asked a Vegas host for a comp room for my sister, she said the best they could do was casino rate.

If I took them up on all of them, chances are I would be bankrupt within a year
lol

Most Las Vegas locals I know, prefer the local casino’s to gamble and tend to avoid the strip. The strip is considered “ tourist territory” with lousy paying games and machines.

I believe the local casino’s are more generous, giving a bigger bang for your buck. Its geared more toward repeat business and customer loyalty.

The local casino’s in many cases have taken steps to return to yester-year Las Vegas, cheap buffets, low limit gambling, gifts, and better comps.

Lets face the facts, most dissatisfied gamblers are primarily loser’s. Losing money creates great dissatisfaction. Very seldom do you hear complaints from Winners. Although I have heard where some Winners complain that they should have won more.

Gambling is a long term loser, and it should be treated as an entertainment expense.

So whether you gamble on the strip or the local casino’s it’s a matter of getting value for your action, and the personal attention you feel … you need.

However, I honestly believe the local casino’s have the advantage and will recover faster than the HIGH-end strip casino’s.

Even the strip casino’s have been courting locals for their recovery with discounted or free shows, food and rooms ... which in the past was ignored.

"Gambling is a long term loser," dont let the APers hear that who talk about the positive VP games at the locals casinos.

Actually, virtually all video poker are positive - for the casinos. But rarely, the advantage goes the other way. And it's real simple:

When the gambler otherwise known as "the casino" has an advantage, they will win in the long run.
When the gambler otherwise known as "the player" has an advantage, he will win in the long run.

Do you really believe just one of those statements, and disbelieve the other?