Quote:
Originally Posted by Land O Lakes
This is all cute.
I see you're in a stage in life where you think higher costs for services provided to consumers automatically mean they are getting better/more for their money and there's not a living soul walking in America that is overpaid for the job they perform.
You also seem to think that when a cardroom raises the rakes that the increased rake goes to pay salaried cardroom employees and not the majority of it going to the casino while a few peanuts go to staff.
It is clear you have very little understanding of the economics of poker rooms. Most poker rooms lose money. Some break even and a couple scratch out small earnings. The financial benefits to a casino are mostly secondary (or even tertiary).
Before responding, please answer one question: why do you think El Dorado closed most of the poker rooms when they took over Caesars Corp?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Land O Lakes
Were you around (20 or so years ago) when Becky raised rakes exorbitantly for the WSOP? Guess who got all that money? We know it wasn't the dealers, floor, management, or other staff based on this and other forums and the yells from the mountaintops. And us players got a worse experience with all the break-in dealers.
Yes. A nice anecdote (a single piece of data shows nothing). If anything it proves my point.
How often do you play poker at Binions nowadays? Never. Why is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Land O Lakes
But I'll touch on your scenario where rakes would be raised to compensate for dealer pay yet people would still tip anyway.
No. Dealer tips would not be allowed. That means if someone ignores the no tipping signs and tips, the dealer hands it back and says he or she is not allowed to accept tips. If the player insists, then the dealer insists that he or she cannot accept tips or their job is at risk. This is not rocket science for players to figure out.
Sure, if was explicitly said that dealers would not accept tips. I would love that. That is not what I was talking about though. Also, why do you think it is that absolutely no poker room in the U.S. has gone to that model?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Land O Lakes
Also, raked games should all be changed to time games. Yeah, it's harder to "put it past" the players but everyone would know how much they're paying from the outset and if they're getting good value for the cost.
I would have no problem with this. None, but I am guessing that participation at lower limits would drop and possibly disappear. It doesn't have to do with economics. It has to do with psychology. The whole part about "putting it past the players" would matter. Time raked games are terrible for a casino (unless the time rake consists of hundreds of dollars per hour such as in peivate casino games).
Here are some undisputable facts:
1. Supply and demand still matter. The amount dealers are paid directly affects the quality of the dealers. Pay can be based upon base pay, tips, or whatever, but in general, it is an economic fact that employee quality is directly highly correlated with pay.
McDonald's doesn't generally draw from the high quality and performance pool of workers.
2. Poker rooms are not printing money for casinos. They MIGHT be break even and it is arguable that there are plenty of 2nd and 3rd order benefits to a casino having a poker room. No doubt. But there is also an economic reason more casinos have shut poker rooms than opened them in thebpast few years.
These are simple, basic economic facts. We can discuss why this is and I would be wide open to alternative scenarios of higher paid dealers that do not accept tips, but unless these are taken into consideration, you might as talknabout a world where everyone can teleport because it is the same science fiction