Last week I gave some examples of disturbing countermeasures casinos are taking against skilled video poker players. Brother, did the Comments section fire up! I didn’t name names because I usually talk about general trends players should know about so they can watch for them in any casino where they play. However, you can check out the Comments if you want some names.
I have been paid some pretty good money in the past to advise casinos on how to make their customers happy. But here is some free, albeit unsolicited, advice for casinos, if there are any casino executives who read this blog – and I have heard through the grapevine that some do.
I accept the fact that casinos don’t plan to be non-profit organizations so I am not 100% “on the other side.” I accept the fact that casinos in Nevada have what seems to be a very strong legal right to decide who is welcome in their establishment and who is not. But I strongly believe there is a right – and a wrong – way to go about this. Sometimes what is good for the player is also good for the casino.
First, in every decision in this area, casino executives should look at the PR aspect. What you do to a few players or even just one does not remain private in this day of social networking. The Internet gambling forums are large and powerful. And upset players are the most vocal. Don’t make hasty decisions that will be implemented immediately. Get input from other people in your company who may see problems you have overlooked. The players you target may have a wide circle of relatives and friends whom you would want to keep as customers.
Whatever tactic you take, don’t leave the explaining to lower-level front-line employees who aren’t equipped with the information or the training to deal with upset customers. Many of these players you are targeting have been your good customers, perhaps even for years. You have heaped benefits on them and often called them your VIPs. Now that you have suddenly changed your mind, it is understandable why they want an explanation. Don’t make them hunt for one or take to the Internet to grouse and ask for answers. They deserve a letter or a phone call, and one that is not nebulous or insulting. Why not thank them for their past business and tell them that you regret this action the casino feels forced to take for economic reasons?
Consider other measures than the extremely public one of 86ing (legally barring) players if there has been no crime committed or major misconduct involved. Marching people out of a casino accompanied by multiple armed guards does not make a casino look good when customers find out – and they will – that the “offense” was being a smart video poker player. The average player knows that the casinos will win most of the time, but this scene will blast their hope and expectation that this casino will let them win at least some of the time.
Smart casinos have found many less extreme measures to effectively deal with “strong” players. They have reduced the benefits on their individual mailers or cut off their mailers entirely. Some casinos have made the machines with the best VP tables ineligible for promotions. Sometimes simply putting a limit on a coupon will still attract the average customers you want and confine the action of the skilled high roller.
In almost all cases, confronting and banning players while they are actually on the floor playing is the result of a casino executive or a group of them trying to cover their behinds, by blaming the customer when they themselves have made a mistake in a policy or a promotion that is going to cost the casino money. It is often a knee-jerk measure to try to save their own job, with no thoughtful consideration of the future consequences for the whole company. Why does this customer need to be confronted today, especially when they may have been playing here for years. One day’s play should not be that catastrophic to the casino’s bottom line. Plenty of time another day to deal with this customer, out of the public eye.
Whatever you do to rein in skilled play, you definitely need to be sure all your casino departments are communicating. I have heard so many stories of players being asked to leave the casino and yet they continue to get mailers. Someone who gets a mailer will logically assume that he/she is still welcome. If you don’t think it is bad PR for very public bannings, what about the possibility of a very public court case? I already see chinks in the tall walls the Nevada courts have built around casinos to protect their business. Here is a small but telling court case and there are lawyers who are willing to take on these cases. One is profiled in this 2006 newspaper article.
In case you think I believe only casinos make mistakes and unwise decisions, stay tuned here for another visit to this subject soon. I believe some “advantage” players deserve blame in this area also. And I will give some suggestions that might help players avoid the biggest guns.
Thanks Jean maybe some of these casino big wigs will read your blogs and take your advise we can only hope.
Norm, speaking as a pro, I doubt we disagree as much as you seem to think. The loudest complaining does not come from pros and APs whose benefits have been reduced; it comes from players of all stripes who have been treated inconsistently, rudely, or unfairly. And there’s been a lot of that lately, as in the case of the Suncoast 86ings Jean mentioned in a previous post.
However, I have to say that you’re dreaming if you think that more casino restrictions on APs will lead to looser machines or promotions. It is easy for a casino to offer these things without making themselves an appealing target for APs… if that’s what they want to do. The reason they don’t do that, is because they don’t want to. They want more of your money, and in today’s VP landscape, competitive pressures aren’t punishing them for getting greedy.
Jean, this article you have written is very professional and offers different views without taking sides. Some of your readers voiced anger and the possibility of boycotts. Your approach of limiting or capping the “bonus” affords compromise with both sides able to sleep nights.
If your love of gaming was not so great, I would think you would be a good candidate for mayor of Las Vegas.
Perhaps you will cover this in your next blog about less-than-sterling actions by advantage players. And you will likely not like this point of view. I’m not so sympathetic with professional and advantage players who are experiencing restrictions on casino benefits that they have long enjoyed. Here’s my (perhaps flawed) reasoning. Serious, advantage players who play perfectly and are able to annually grind out winnings along with big casino benefits for themselves do so at the expense of the vast majority of ordinary (non-advantaged) video poker players. Non-professionals simply want to play games with decent, good – full pay -payouts. Casinos really like our business because we don’t play perfectly and they make money from us. Non-professionals don’t hog full-pay machines during juicy promotions. Non advantage players don’t end each year winning money. We enjoy playing the game in our non-perfect manner. But, because of the advantage players, casinos have to take actions that protect their financial interests. As you say, casinos are not non-profit organizations. So, casinos have been removing full pay machines. And benefits for all video poker players are lessened. Now, it’s even more difficult for the VAST majority of video poker players to stretch their gaming dollars. Professional, advantage players are making it harder for the rest of us. It’s hard to be sympathetic to advantage players who may no longer receive complimenatry cruises, expensive giveaways, suites, lavish meals for extended number of family members, etc. The average player appreciates receiving whatever modest benefits that may come our way. I do agree, however, that casinos are totally at fault for physically removing players from the casino floor. That’s just wrong. Casinos have every right to restrict and even eliminate its benefits to professionals and serious advantage players. Banning them from future play is excessive and wrong. If professionals and serious advantage players no longer receive big benefits, they will probably play less and the casinos will receive more winnings. This probably will lead to a better deal for the average player. Reinstalling more full play machines (especially lower demoninations) and perhaps offering better benefits which will only make it better for the vast majority of video poker players.