Hotels aren’t responsible for how travel sites advertise their rates. And, most, if not all hotels, would rather have you book directly through them since then they don’t pay a cut any third party for the booking.

Lastly, there is no fine print when it comes to charges. When you go to place your order, all charged are laid out. If you don’t like them, you don’t have to make the purchase. And even if you do make the purchase, you usually have ample time to cancel.

Frankly, dealing with hotels is a pleasure compared to other travel-related industries (like airlines).

This persistent whining about resort fees is really kinda of silly. People act like, if it weren’t for the fees, hotel rooms would be much cheaper. Wrong. The hotels would get their pound of flesh one way or another. With resort fees, they get to keep a little more of the money since they don’t pay third parties a cut of the fees and they’re also treated differently for tax purposes (or have been in the past).

If there’s anything people should get annoyed by, it’s the general reduction in service in all of these industries, despite the increases in overall price.

Hands down the best SCHEDULING TOOL for a vegas trip is Cocolegros https://vegas-poker-schedule.com/

He had a great thread last year on 2 + 2 -- Two other posters did fine structure rating programs S factors this is one link https://www.rainbowspuppiessunshine.com/pokercalc/

BINGO....exactly what I was referring to earlier. Wont play a side event without checking Cocolegros ratings.

Monster Stack has been a freeze-out in all prior years. You can play either day 1A or 1B, but not both. I wouldn't expect a change this year.

Actually, hotels are 100% responsible for the prices they submit to travel sites. If the sites want to discount them or whatever, that’s on them. But the general nightly rate is set by the hotels, not the site. It’s bizarre of you to think sites dictate hotel prices. You even acknowledge the resort fees were implemented as a response to third party websites as a way for the hotels to keep more money yet you try to make my assertion of the same thing seem offbase.

The hidden price concept seems to be going over your head. When someone is looking for a hotel, it’s fairly common for them to sort by price. So they’ll see a room at Caesar’s Palace for $45/night right next to Four Queens for $45/night. Well, Caesar’s seems like the obvious choice so they go to book it for two nights. Suddenly, instead of the price being around $90, it shoots up to $200 after all fees and taxes. So they go back to the search feeling as though they were deceived BECAUSE THEY WERE up until the time of purchase.

How can you sit there and pretend like people are being silly for being mad about these deceptive practices? Why should they be ok with it? Because they aren’t as abusive as the airlines? That makes sense to you? Give me a break.

And if you observe “persistent whining” of people being deceived by resort fees, maybe get off your high horse and realize there’s an actual reason so many people are complaining about it. A reason you’re either choosing to ignore or clearly don’t understand.

Hotels should just list the cost of a room per night. Period. No additional fees. Just the cost. Shoot, they can even advertise it as “No Resort Fee” and people would be willing to pay the extra cost just knowing hidden fees won’t be tacked on.

You ought to read posts carefully before going off on tirades. Where exactly did I say hotels are not responsible for setting their prices? Or conveying their prices to third parties?

I said they are not responsible for how third party sites advertise their rates. In other words, CAESARS is not responsible for the third party site listing their $45 next to the $45 of the four queens.

As far as hidden fees are conserned, the only ones people should really fret over are ones that are applied after the purchase is made. Those are truly hidden fees. When the screen says you need to fork over $200, it is not hiding anything.
The fact that the original advertisement of the price was not accurate (even deceptive, if you like) is truly irrelevant. The purpose of advertisements is to deceive. If you’d like to go off on a truth in advertising mission, be my guest. And good luck with that.

What I find most interesting about your complaints, and those of many others, is that it’s not the actual cost of the product that bothers you. But rather it’s the fact that the advertisement practices of these third party sites somehow hurts your pride. You even said yourself, you’d be willing to pay a premium as long as they served things up to you on a platter and didn’t require your to do just a little bit of critical thinking when it came to making your purchasing decisions.

Any word if there will be bracelet events after the Main Event again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BTW, I hadn’t used it in a while, but I just went on Travelocity to see how they advertise rates. And right there next to the room rate it shows (“excludes $44/nt resort fee”). And when you go to make the purchase, it separated the amount the third party collects and the amount collected by the hotel at checkout. So basically, Travelocity not only cuts up your steak, but chews it a little for you too. I don’t know what third party sites you use, but perhaps you should be shopping around for better ones.

Wow, you really just don’t get it. You’re so out of touch with how people think and feel, it’s bizarre.

First of all, the point of advertising is NOT to deceive. It’s to sell a product or service. I don’t know what you do for a living but if you need to deceive people to buy it, you’re doing it wrong.

Secondly, it’s not about “pride.” It’s about honesty and not feeling as though you are being taken advantage of, manipulated, or conned into being sold a false bill of goods. You seem to enjoy it in a creepy masochistic way but most people don’t care for that. It’s not about having things “served on a silver platter.” You act as though it’s unreasonable to want to know the total cost of a product or service up front before the actual time of purchase. Imagine buying groceries and being charged an additional fee of varying amounts for each product at the register. That sounds like a good thing to you?

Lastly, most people are now aware of resort fees and don’t require “critical thinking” to know they’ll be tacked on. When resort fees first started, that was the biggest complaint. Now, the bigger issue people have a problem with is trying to conveniently find the best value within your budget. That’s the whole point of third party sites and yet your results are skewed when doing a search. So instead of a fast and convenient service, you’re made to tally every nonsensical fee up to determine which is really the best value. I never said I would pay a premium for upfront pricing, I said PEOPLE would. And I think if a travel site were to show the overall total cost after all taxes and fees and allowed people to search for rooms in that fashion, it would take off in popularity.

And I’m sure that “excludes $44/nt resort fee” was in just as large writing as the actual listed price. After all, you said there was no fine print so it must be the same font size, right? And listing results in that way skew the search results. For a more thorough post, see the one I just completed.

Oh and since many countries have banned the practice and people in the US have sued about it, perhaps there IS something to complain about:

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

I think you would benefit from understanding my point of view under the Legality, Australia section. I would post it here but I don’t want to deprive you of this critical thinking exercise nor do I want to cut your steak and chew it, too, before serving it on a silver platter for you.

It seems your entire problem is with the third party sites you use and how they provide their services. This has nothing to do with the decision by hotels to charge resort fees.

As for the legalities in Australia, or anywhere else, I’m not really sure why it’s germain. Las Vegas is not in Australia, yet.

Guess you failed the critical thinking exercise again. I’ll break it down for you: if it’s an illegal practice in a number of other countries, perhaps there is something more problematic with it other than people “whining” or “wanting things on a silver platter.” I didn’t think my point was that difficult to grasp but I suppose sometimes you need to really bring it down to your audience’s level.

Again, I don’t think the words I’m writing are translating correctly in your head. Where did I say there was “no fine print”. Of course there’s fine print, though the disclosure of “excludes $44/ nt. fee” would hardly qualify. It’s actually quite clear. As are the total costs on the purchase page.

But, the fact that fine print exists and is allowed to exist pretty much makes my point that the purpose of advertising, at least at a fundamental level, is to deceive. I mean, some company is suggesting you should give them money for something you didn’t want before the advertisement and probably don’t need. The advertisement is not there to give you all the information you might need to make an informed decision about whether or not the transaction would be a good one for you. It is there, in effect, to give you enough information to become interested, and not enough info to become diswayed.

This is pretty much why advertising laws exist. To regulate the amount of deception allowed.

I’ll just leave this here.

I think my point has been made and I don’t see the point in continuing with such a dense wall. Have a good day and enjoy your fees!

Your supposition is plain wrong. There are all sorts of laws all over the world that you would find detestable. The fact that you agree with a particular law found in another country does not speak to its validity or appropriateness for this country. And your argument is not at all hard to understand. You think you have some sort of right to not be incovenienced. You said yourself it’s not a question of deception, since you already know about the fees. It’s a matter that you don’t want to have to take extra steps to compare prices. You believe the government should step in and make sure you are able to compare prices in the manner which you prefer. Because after all, it’s a moral and societal imperative.

The funny thing about it is, if your idea had any merit or any market, you wouldn’t need laws to make it happen. Someone would come along and offer it and they would be really successful doing so. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone has, in fact. But, of course, the issue is all about laziness so why engage in commerce when the government can hold one’s hand and take care of everything for you?

I’m certain the whining will cease.

And I don’t enjoy paying more for the products and services I’m interested in purchasing. But I also don’t need a nanny state to force private concerns to serve my needs in exactly the way I want. I get to choose what I buy and I’m not going to go crying and whining to big brother if I don’t get what I want.

Actually, I take issue with a variety of problems with resort fees. The current most tangible one is the search process but the principle alone is another issue. They force me to pay for goods and services I choose not to use.

If you would stop being so lazy and actually read the arguments in the Wikipedia I linked for you, you would see a clearer outline of the many complaints people have in the US about the legality of these fees.

But you won’t look because you’re lazy. Pot, meet kettle.

And I’m not surprised a guy who thinks deception in advertising is ok thinks deception in pricing is also ok. I’m not a fan of the nanny state, either, but I hate corruption and predatory behavior on consumers even more. I guess that just shows where my values and principles are and where you lack yours.

Again, if you’d care to educate yourself, read the article. Or keep doubling down on your nonsense because your ego won’t let you admit you’re wrong. Whatever floats your boat.

Gentlemen may I suggest you take this stimulating discussion to https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...gas-lifestyle/

They had a nice thread on Hotels there............. and you two can debate the ethics of resort fees, marketing practices, travel services to your hearts content.

Last I checked this was the WSOP thread for heaven's sake - GEEZ

Nah, it’s been discussed ad nauseam.

Big 50 will be even bigger than the first Colossus. You heard it here first.

I've played my last one. It's fun when you get put at a table with a bunch of funny guys in their 60's and 70's telling stories. Not so much at a table full of 80 and 90 years olds coughing and weezing, oozing various substances from under a half dozen band-aids that are always asleep when it's their turn to act.

Can it really be that bad? I’m too young for those but you make it sound potentially terrible.

Yea it’s a real travesty having to take money from old fats, asleep at the table.

If only the WSOP would give us something else to talk about 😝

I get where that poster is coming from . Geez I get pissed listening to them go into great detail hours on end about every friggen illness they and everyone else has. Sadly I am a senior but avoid being around my peers unless absolutely necessary.
For instance the 50+ Senior event. Their chips are more than a welcomed addition to my stack.