Quote:
Originally Posted by akashenk
I wasn't talking about prices, or structures, or single day tournaments. But other than that, you comments are spot on, as usual.
And FYI, the Venetian is no higher than 6th on my list of friends, but it definitely moved up when they got rid of the scent they used to pump into the air.
I must have been a little testy so my apologizes. My problem with guarantees is that I see them as inflationary.
If the house guarantees then they have to have a good feel for the pulse of the guarantee , otherwise they will put themselves a risk .The tournament directors know this and so they can hedge in different ways:
Increase the buy in, say from $150 to $180, which effectively negates some of the "guarantee".
Keep the same buy in of $150 and make the event (s) multiday which the Nugget has done on the weekends.
Keep the $150 and hope for the best but for the Nugget it may be questionable for : they return approximately 72% to the prize pool which make them the one of the highest raked events during the series.
With 325 runners, not unusual during this event, the total [pool would be 150x325or $48750 and the return to players would be .72x48750 or $35100 .
These dailies were guaranteeing 20K and so in some measure to go to a 30K guarantee may be too close for comfort, 25K possibly. they may be right on the edge for guarantees , at present, at least for the dailies.
This doesn't consider the need for space and dealers if the guarantees are for the dailies and this increases the numbers for this could present with cost overruns but I'm going too far here.
I know you spoke to the main event so I don't have access to those figures but I still comprehend that increasing guarantees is inflationary in some manner, for the house, if its on the ball, aren't going to have a "give away "if they can possibly help it.