This poll was suggested by Thomas D, whom we thank for it.
The first thing we need to make clear is that it's thus far unclear who will operate the Venetian. Both the real estate investment trust that's buying the land (VICI Properties) and the holding company that will arrange for the operators (Apollo Management) are connected to Caesars (and you can read the recent QoD in which we analyzed it), so it's a distinct possibility that the new Caesars Entertainment management will be in charge on the ground. Still, nothing official has been announced; it could go in a completely different direction.
So the question is, if Caesars Entertainment does end up running the Venetian/Palazzo, what will it look like in 12 months from the player's and guest's perspective?
We were planning on going with three choices: better, worse, or the same, but thanks to excellent reasoning by dblund, we changed "same" to "similar."
There are a myriad of reasons that respondents will have for their better-worse-similar choices, so as suggested by Roy, we're sticking to the KISS principal. Obviously, you can vote for only one choice. You can, as always, express your opinions and beliefs in the comment boxes -- and thank you for participating.
| If taken over by Caesars, the Venetian/Palazzo will be worse. |
|
||
| If taken over by Caesars, the Venetian/Palazzo will be similar. |
|
||
| If taken over by Caesars, the Venetian/Palazzo will be better. |
|
These results definitely speak for themselves.
Caesars Entertainment is, without a doubt, the dog when it comes to improving the way the Venetian and Palazzo have been run since they were built and opened by Las Vegas Sands. More than seven out of ten respondents are pessimistic about the results of a Caesars takeover of these two upscale casino-resorts. The rest, for various reasons (better poker room, more extensive loyalty program, and online gaming and mobile sports betting, to name the big three), are optimistic.
Of course, we won't know for a while which casino company will ultimately manage the properties, so we'll have to wait and see what happens.
Like Ray, I visited Venetian once, shortly after it opened: once was enough. And the same for Wynn. As for the rest of the strip, I've been to Caesars Palace once, to a restaurant; to Harrah's once, to a poker tournament, dodging time-share hustlers coming and going; and to a few shows here and there: Breck Wall, Mac King, Rich Little, Fantasy, etc. But that was before parking fees. For the future, I might go back to the strip, most likely for poker, if my significant other insisted ("yes, dear...") but I wouldn't suggest it myself. Let's just say I'm probably not in their primary target demographic, and the feeling is mutual. And it's pretty much the same downtown. There are still a few off-strip places worth visiting; but only a few, and getting fewer all the time. As Jerry puts it, Las Vegas is turning into a dump. The sad thing is that I've been watching it turning into a dump in slow motion, for over fifty years. And thanks to Kevin for the new (to me) term: "Strip-horrible."