Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="dj11, post: 3291430, member: 13851"]
Live casinos would probably prefer to do away with live poker.  From a $/sq ft POV, poker is probably less valuable than the free buffets!  The fees and/or rake cover the cost of spreading the games, but more slots would make them more money per square foot over the long run.

This is why some casinos should back online poker.  They can drop many of the live tables, and instead focus on events, tied in with online satellites.

Cardrooms are a bit different.  They grew up figuring out out to make a profit at small margins.  They tend to cater to a fixed audience, unlike the whole city of Las Vegas, which is highly dependent on 'visitors', and conventioneers.

The co-operation between B&M rooms and OLP seems so natural I am surprised there is any resistance.  Greedy outside interests is the problem IMO.

Somehow, the whole US decided 4 or 5 decades ago to let Native American Tribes get into gaming as a Unique Legal Entity.  They took that to mean they had some sort of authority to 'control' gaming even outside their jurisdictions.

I have never figured that logic out.  But here in the States, it looms large.  And for me, in California, it is the paramount obstruction to the legislation necessary to get the consumer protections we Ca poker players want.

Those California tribes have probably saved Las Vegas and all of Nevada from fading away by resisting those big Casino entities from establishing themselves in Ca.  And they have resisted hard.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us

Language