Question of the Day - 26 June 2020

The answer is somewhat misleading. Each individual slot can be set to a certain payback percentage, and VP machines can be given various paytables. So within the extremely broad range (>75% payback) mandated by those mighty casino watchdogs, the casinos can set the paybacks of individual machines to whatever they like.

So of course, they've turned off all the tight machines and kept the loose ones lit up. Because, y'know, they love us.

But the average payback on the strip was between 92-94% before the closure, that doesn't mean that every machine wasn't set to 75% now. All still legal and with the lack of true competition where is a player to go? MGM and Caesars own the strip

Guaranteed, for sure, absolutely.  If the average payback was 92% before the pandemic, you can be sure it will be lower now.  My friends tell me that they chopped up VP and made them worse, but still within the 75% limit.  So instead of 92% slots, they set them to 85%.  Small difference in the number, huge difference in actual dollars that we lose, and they gain.  Unless players stop playing where the house hold is high, and go where its lower, it will stay that way, specially on the strip. If you feel like you have no chance, even knowing that its a losing proposition, why go there.  I am going to wait to see how it all settles out.  One of those properties is going to advertise that they have 98% or 95% machines soon, and the players will come.  Remember Ballys 98% machines maybe 20 years ago?  You could not find a seat, even at 2am.  I knew one of the slot managers back then, and he said that small area made more money than half of the rest of the casino.  But you felt you could win

The table games minimum has been RAISED to $10 .....has to be to account for the lesser players and other COVID related restrictions ......think they will go back down when restrictions are lifted .....I DON’T THINK SO .......

I would counter that the strip is not owned by MGM and Caesars
You have the Wynn, the Venetian, Casino Royale, Tropicana, Strat, TI, SLS. I am sure I am forgetting a few. 

The house hold % wise at a $10 table is the same as a $5 table. If you can only have 1/2 the players the higher limits are justified. 

What I find amusing is that the Caesars total rewards app has a "learn blackjack" feature. The min bit for the app is $5, BJ pays 3:2 and surrender is offered. You would be hard pressed to find a Caesars strip property with a $10 min table and that set of  rules. If you want 3:2 you need to be playing at a min $25/hand.

I play at the Southpoint and the machines feel the same to me in payouts.  Also, other than the big equestrian events, I would wager that only 50% of the machines are being used at  any given time.  I see that downtown as well.  

The new Circa resort is set to open in late October and it has a young independent owner without corporate ties to the Strip. I'm hoping he's a bit of a maverick in this industry like a young Steve Wynn was and the Circa will do things that shakeup the norm for casino games. Maybe it will have higher percentages on their machines and player-favorable rules at table games, at least initially, and they will see how much business they get (or don't get). If play there is really brisk then perhaps other casinos will notice and put that in place. Many players feel that if a casino would give them a decent chance to win they'd get tons of business. But a lot of the Strip casinos do it differently, they rely on uninformed players and fresh visitors with little idea there are differences in machines as far as winning percentages. The Strip corporate owners generally listen to the accountants about maximizing every part of the resort, so that's a hard thing to change. New casinos might help. 

... seven percent is a small difference, you really aren't qualified to speak on anything regarding the mathematics of gambling. Such an increase would be a 100 PERCENT INCREASE on the existing hold.

Kevin's facetiousness is always entertaining...but really, the point of it is that without changing any machine, the casino can shut off the higher paying machines and keep the lower ones on. I think I read somewhere that the penny slots were paying an average of 85% to 88%. If that is a mixture of machines that pay from 80% to 93% for example, most of the 93's could be shut off and the average becomes lower. No change on any machine is needed, just shrewd placement.

... it's not nearly that simple.

The manufacturer of the machine has a say, too. Certainly, Aristocrat or IGT doesn't want the "ridiculously tight" label on their machines. Additionally, there are lease fees that the casinos pay, and on statewide progressives, the manufacturer also takes a percentage based on coin-in, not hold. Bottom line, machines that get played the most are the ones that are going to get priority -- the casino makes more money off $100K coin-in with a 5 percent hold than it does off $45K coin-in with a 10 percent hold. 

Furthermore, the state requires compliance from the casinos, and doesn't allow them to change payback on a whim. There's far more than one hoop to jump through when adjusting payback, and unless you're privy to what the competition is doing, there's almost zero guarantee that such changes would result in an increase in the bottom line.

We just cut our GVR trip after one day/night because of poor social distancing and not having the fun we used to have. They didn't turn off any machines and the maskless wonders pull empty chairs to wherever they want. They don't care that it's next to someone! We did find that the buffet was part of our good times. By closing it down, and, simultaneously doing away with the cafe specials, we felt less than appreciated. Combined with the lowering of the slot club points per dollar in, we had seen enough. We cashed out $639.00 and don't plan on going back. The Aquarius slot club is now better and they turned machines off and removed chairs.

Pat, you may have missed my point. They can do almost anything they want without going through the red tape of changing the chips in the machines. The casinos would analyze what the feel is their best approach, lower payoffs, higher payoffs, or similar, and maneuver the stock to fit the bill. The way they are paying manufacturers certainly may determine whether or not those machines are among the "offs" or "ons". They can do a lot WITHOUT doing anything to the machines. 

My statement was that the 7% may not sound like a lot, but it is a huge loss in player dollars.  I agree, its a huge difference, and that's what I meant.  And in the few days since, friends have gone to Harrahs So Cal Resort.  They say that the machines seem the same as before.  Almost all the VP is the same, just half are working.  They enjoyed their stay, and actually left ahead.  The casino floor is not exciting or rambunctious as it was before, and masks are mandatory, as they should be.  

NONSENSE. I gamble in Vegas, Atlantic City, Biloxi, Detroit & New Orleans and I have NEVER has such a massive LOSING STREAK at slots. 

Make no mistake, I AM A GAMBLER. I pack between $5,000-$10,000 with me on each visit, I read my Win/Loss statements. I know for a fact that the house can and does tighten/loosen slots. A slot programmer in New Orleans, TOLD ME TO MY FACE that they tightened up the slots as much as legally allowed by state law. 

Is the same thing going on in Las Vegas, or anywhere else? I’m not sure because no one admitted it to me, but my Win/Loss reports have been pretty damning since the pandemic, although I do fare better in Las Vegas at MGM properties better than anywhere else. 

@Jay: Vici Properties (who owns Caesars) purchased The Venetian, MGM bought Cosmo, and The Strat in NOT in the strip.