That is good to hear that they re-did the rooms at Bally's I'll definitely be looking into staying there.

And to clear up my view about the "year round poker destination" I should be clear to state that I don't think a poker-only destination is sustainable. My idea about Bally's is that, if you are familiar with the casino, or anyone that has arrived by monorail, you'll note that the back of the bally's casino is DEAD SPACE right now. The downstairs corridor could be re-vitalized with a state of the art sports book and healthy food options, a health club, all the things that would appeal to our demographic. Bally's actually lists their convention space to be larger than The Rio's (I have never explored the area but I'm skeptical) So they wouldn't have to build-out if they didn't want to, but there is a ton of empty adjacent lots to expand to. Convention Space / Poker Room Space isn't a complicated build-out.

My main point of it was that CET really could be making better use of the WSOP brand.

Fellas, what can be done about the menace that is resort fees? These are such a blatant scam that they're beginning to infuriate me. I remember just maybe 3-4 years ago staying at Circus Circus and paying basically nothing for my room, but now the price has probably doubled because of the resort fee, which adds no value to my experience.

Is Air BNB viable in Vegas or just too dodgy when you may be carrying a lot of cash? Are there any cheap options that don't charge a resort fee? I see that a few places like the Four Queens still don't force it on you.

I may be looking to play the Circuit events at PH and Bally's in the next year, and I definitely plan to attend the WSOP again next summer. Looking to do so with minimal overhead and "sleep rake".

Evaluating the respective costs may help :

https://www.lasvegasjaunt.com/las-ve...es-2018-guide/

If you have status with Mlife or Total Rewards, I believe there are tiers that waive the resort fees. In the absence of such status, then the only casino property I know of that has no resort fee is Four Queens. Golden Nugget sends occasional email offers for rooms without resort fee being charged. Of course, you THEN have to offset the costs of getting back and forth to center Strip and the money value of your time in those travels.

Staying downtown will give you the cash games at the Nugget which can be quite nice at times. Beyond that, cash games will be limited.

I absolutely hear you about the fees...when I was out there last week, my room at Aria was roughly $70 a night. However, with taxes, resort fees added almost $45 a night to the total.

For longer stays, I know you can do a room for a month at Vdara and they waive the resort fees. However, you still have a hefty amount on the tab when viewed on a per-night basis.

If you have a vehicle, then there may be some non-casino properties that lend themselves to lower per-night and no resort fee, but I have never really researched them...discussions about those sorts of places can be found in LVL.

If you are aware of the fee, how is it a "scam"?

It's just a way for the casinos to drive up prices and revenue while maintaining the illusion of low rates. If you go on Booking.com and look at hotel options in Vegas, the actual price at check out ends up being far higher than the listed price due to the resort fees, which are actually higher than the nightly room cost at some casinos. Casino management argues that resort fees are good for the customer because they prevent you from having to pay a la carte for various services, but realistically it's like cable companies forcing you to buy a package of 500 channels when all you really want is ESPN and HBO. It's a totally anti-customer policy designed to inflate costs and revenues while squeezing out third parties like Booking and Expedia, who get nothing from the resort fee (their cut of the % for rooms they sell comes only out of the nightly room price).

Your argument loses validity given that the fee is disclosed on the website page though. I just went and looked and the very first listing was at Mandalay Bay. Listing includes language that "Excluded: 13.38 % TAX, US$ 41.95 resort fee per night" which makes clear that an additional fee is going to be charged.

It may not be a fee that most like, but it IS disclosed and thus is not 'a scam.'

I disagree that it is 'anti-customer' and really don't care if the third-party entities don't get a cut...I never use them anyhow and generally do better going through the property itself. I have ALSO seen instances where upgrades were NOT available when the booking was through the third-party site (I have used AXP Travel in the past since Platinum cardholders get a 5x point boost when booked through the site, which is how I learned about some properties not upgrading when a third-party is used to book the stay).

Intriguing but I’m guessing the wear and tear on the turf/grass will be excessive if they were to allow it. Unless a cheap temporary floor can be laid down over it. It’d also make surveillance, security, and other necessities a bit problematic.

But the biggest hurdle would probably getting the NGC onboard with it.

You guys are complete semantic nits. Maybe not “scam” but ripoff. Geez, you all knew what he was saying and nobody likes these fees so how about cutting a little slack?

I don't think CET would ever do something like that since they have a perfectly good home, but if they ever lost that home or if the WSOP were ever sold, it would definitely be intriguing. There would obviously be a number of logistical hurdles to get over, but that is the case in most venues.

To my knowledge, the hotel is not required to make sure the booking agencies make more money than they are entitled to. Why do you feel differently?

And I agree that these fees are a mechanism for the hotels to increase their bottom line and some consumers will be confused by them. But as far as I know, the hotels are complying with all regulations regarding the disclosure of the fees. If you don't think that's good enough, you should take it up with the government agencies that regulate this sort of stuff. They may be more open to hearing your complaints.

And lastly, your original post on this topic seems to indicate that you used to pay "basically nothing" for a room, and now you have to pay more. While I understand how you might prefer that not to be the case, what I don't get is why you feel like you're entitled to pay basically nothing for a service somebody is selling. Maybe the folks at Circus Circus though you were scamming them all that time you were paying basically nothing, and now they're just getting back at you.

Resort fees are neither a scam nor a ripoff. And maybe a little semantic nitty-ness would do the world some good.

This give a good presentation of the legalise involved including perspectives from the European Union and Australia. We can only hope, and apparently its illegal to charge for internet access(?).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resort_fee

Yea, of course the seller will try to get the best price possible and the buyer will do the same. That's to be expected. That doesn't mean resort fees aren't bad for the average customer.

The argument made by the MGM execs is that it's pro-consumer because it means you no longer have to pay a la carte for services...but isn't paying a la carte for services ideal since it means you're only paying for what you actually need/use and not paying extra for anything else? Why should I be forced to pay for stuff like the pool, parking, and Internet when I'm never going to use it?

If I go down to the hardware store because I want to buy a wrench, I wouldn't be very happy if they forced me to also buy a hammer, screwdriver, and tape measure as well in a pre-packaged tool kit, even if the guy at the register insisted that this is good for me because now I don't have to pay for my tools a la carte.

If you have some sort of weird BDSM relationship with businesses where you relish them devising clever ways to extract more of your money then I guess you must love paying more for the same product, but that's not me. Resort fees aren't good for the average customer. They're good for shareholders and gambling executives, but most people who visit or live in Vegas don't belong to either group.

You’re argument is pretty weak. There are lots of things in your life which you don’t pay for “a-la-carte” which don’t cause you to lose any sleep... like the roads you drive on, or the fire station in your town, or the web forums you visit to make ridiculous posts on. You’ve likely got a ton of bandwidth available to you through your ISP which you aren’t using, and yet you’re paying for it. When you belly up to the buffet at the MGM, you don’t get to decide which food items you’re willing to pay for and which you aren’t. I can go on and on.

The point is, it now costs more to stay at hotels in Vegas than it used to. And you’re also getting more services offered to you in exchange for the increased cost. It’s up to you to decide whether the increased services are worth the increased cost. No one is forcing you to do anything. The decision is entirely yours. You may not like the fact that the cost has changed and your personal view of the value of the product has not. But that is not emblematic of anything underhanded on the part of the hotels.

Those are ridiculous comparisons. More correctly, the hotel customer is being forced to subscribe to an ISP they never use at all, and are being charged to eat at a buffet they never visit at all. Next they will be charged for parking even though they arrived in a taxi. Or charged for a tuxedo they never rent. Why not gambling losses in a game they never played?

While I completely understand resort fees from a business perspective - you can advertise low room rates but add on fee's that might actually increase the cost by 50 % - 100% during the week. How from a consumer point of view it can be a positive for the MAJORITY of guests is an incredible stretch of logic.

While there are plenty of examples in taxation that are equivalent --- Real Estate tax funding of education when you have no children comes to mind -- a better model FOR THE CONSUMER is say a gasoline tax for roads -- You pay a fuel tax AND you utilize the highways.

There is no reasonable argument from a CONSUMER / GUEST perspective that does NOT use "the pool" or the "fitness center" that justifies the fee.

Again while I understand and appreciate resort fee's from the BUSINESS perspective don't attempt to justify it from a guest perspective unless you simply believe that ALL guests should subsidize what some guests want to do.

You are not being forced to subscribe. You don’t have to use the additional services.

No one said it’s a positive for the majority of consumers. It’s an increased cost. How would that be seen as a positive for the majority of consumers? My only point is it isn’t a scam. It’s just the way hotels make more money now. If the resort fees didn’t exist, the cost would still go up, perhaps even more so.

Resort fees are an angle shoot. Not expressly illegal\scam\etc, but not right.

An angle shoot against third-party booking services and tax collectors... sure. An angle shoot against consumers... no. An argument can be made that consumers are paying less under this framework than if they had just increased the nightly rates.

As to the former, why should the hotels care about the booking services? And everybody angle shoots to reduce their tax burden. So, I don't see what isn't "right" about it.

What isn't right is that it allows the hotels to advertise rates that aren't what you actually pay. How can a consumer defend this practice?

Welcome to life.

Book a flight, select the price, then you get taxes, and 9/11 segment fee, and depending on airline, seat fee, bag fee etc.

The hotel makes it clear before booking exactly what you will pay. The histrionics in this thread act like the hotel says "OK, $40 a night it is, see ya Saturday" then when you check out they are like "BAM another $40 sucker!".

When I book a flight on an airline's site, the fare already includes taxes and fees. Find a better example.

The airline fair may not include baggage fees. Find a better example.

And this is from the aria booking site. I assume other hotels do something similar. Where is the confusion?

Reservation Information

Room Requests Total: +$0.00
Adjusted Room Subtotal: $159.00
Estimated Taxes*: +$21.27
Resort Fee and Estimated Tax*: +$44.22

Reservation Total: $224.49
Deposit Due Now: $180.27
Estimated Balance Due Upon Check-in: $44.22

Kevmath just tweeted a link to an article from cdc gaming reports in which Ty Stewart of the WSOP briefly mentions the possibility of moving from the Rio to another location such as the new Caesars Convention space mentioned earlier.

https://www.cdcgamingreports.com/mul...5-days-a-year/

Hopefully I’ve posted the link above correctly and everyone can read the article.