slot machines at the Commerce?

[Boris]

I guess there is some sort of petition to allow slot machines at the commerce and other non-indian casinos. The conventional wisdom seems to be that this will kill poker. I don't think so. Look at the people who play the slots. They are little old ladies or people who don't have the disposable income to play poker. Furthermore, the urge to gamble for a poker player is not satisfied by playing slots. They are two completely different forms of entertainment. IMO, if slot machines are allowed there will be a marginal decrease in the action at the lower limits and some of the table games. I don't think the mid and high limit games will be affected very much if at all.

[Dynasty]

The reason poker will be impacted is because the Commerce and other casinos will get rid of all their poker tables and replace them entirely with slot machines which bring in many, many times more money. There's a limited amount of casino space in California at the moment and it's all going to be used for slots if the casino owners are allowed to bring them in.

The market in L.A. for slot players dwarfs the market for poker players just like everywhere else. Why do you think places like the Bellagio and Mirage have so much space devoted to slot machines and so little devoted to poker tables?

[andyfox]

Rick Nebiolo has argued this from the moment he heard that slots might come to the non-Indian casinos. While both you and he make good points, I'm not so sure.

Southern California has always been the poker capital of the country. Gardena supported five fair-sized casinos for a long time, from the 1930s until the 1980s when the more upscale and bigger cardbarns opened. In theory, there was no room for the Asian games when they were legalized. All of the casinos expanded. While they may, to some extent, be somewhat hemmed in, if they can't build out, they'll just build up.

My sense is that some of the casinos will specialize in poker, just as in Vegas. Each poker table generates about a million dollars in drop/rake, so while I assume slot machines are indeed more profitable, it's not like they're losing money on poker. My understanding is that there will be a limit on the number of slot machines, so even if the casinos wanted to, they couldn't fill their entire building with slot machines.

There will be, one would think, a helluva lot more people interested in playing slots as in playing poker. But that means a helluva lot more people coming into the casino, and certainly a percentage of them will want to try their hand at the game they see on TV.

[andyfox]

From the L.A. Times:

Sheriff's Stand on Slots May Benefit Big Donors

Lee Baca endorses an initiative that could aid law enforcement budgets and bring profits to racetracks and card rooms.

By Dan Morain and Richard Marosi
Times Staff Writers

March 28, 2004

SACRAMENTO — Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca's promotion of an initiative to allow slot machines at card rooms and racetracks could benefit one of his biggest donors, a review of his campaign finances shows.

Card clubs, horse tracks and people affiliated with them — who could profit from the measure if it makes the ballot and passes — have given Baca $50,000 since he was elected five years ago. While that is a fraction of the $2.2 million he has raised for campaigns, it is not all he has received from gambling interests.

Baca's nonprofit corporation, the Sheriff's Youth Foundation, has received $115,700 since 2001 from the state's largest card room, the Commerce Casino.

Sacramento County Sheriff Lou Blanas, the other prominent law enforcement official backing the initiative, has accepted almost $50,000 from donors with gambling interests since 1996.

Card rooms and horse tracks are financing the initiative, which is intended for the November ballot. It could end the state's restriction of Nevada-style gambling to Indian lands and allot 30,000 slot machines — the most lucrative game for any casino owner — to existing card clubs and racetracks in Southern California and the Bay Area.

Many law enforcement officials shun the measure, but a letter bearing the two sheriffs' signatures will arrive in mailboxes starting Monday, urging voters to sign petitions to place it on the ballot.

The letter says the measure would provide $2 billion a year for law enforcement, education-related programs and fire protection by forcing Indian tribes, which currently make relatively modest payments to the state from their gambling proceeds, to pay more or lose their monopoly.

"The enclosed petition simply asks the Indian casinos to agree to pay their fair share for the exclusive monopoly that we have given them," the letter states.

The initiative specifies that, if tribes do not agree, the card rooms and racetracks will be entitled to slot machines and will pay the state a percentage of their take.

Both sheriffs dismissed any connection between their endorsements and the contributions they have received.

"There is no sustained source of funding for law enforcement," Blanas said, adding that his department stands to receive $12 million yearly in gambling proceeds if the initiative passes.

"I need more public safety money," Baca said in an interview. "That is my motivation."

Baca oversees the nation's largest sheriff's department. He is promoting the initiative at the same time he warns against cuts to his $1.65-billion budget. To save money, he has been releasing inmates early from county jails.

USC law professor Elizabeth Garrett, director of the USC-Caltech Center for the Study of Law and Politics, said the donations to the sheriff give the "appearance" that he supports the measure, at least partly, because of the campaign funds.

"However independently he made up his mind," Garrett said, "there is an appearance that part of what went into his decision was a feeling of gratitude for that group's support for a cause that is very important to him."

The sheriffs' letter, being sent to 2 million Californians, is intended to help proponents obtain the 600,000 valid signatures of registered voters needed to put the measure on the November ballot. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians is pushing a competing initiative that would allow tribes unlimited casino expansion rights on their own land.

Under the initiative backed by Baca and Blanas, if tribes declined to pay the state 25% of their gambling winnings or to abide by all of several other terms spelled out in the measure, five horse racetracks and 11 card rooms would get the 30,000 slots. Seven card rooms in Los Angeles County and three racetracks in Los Angeles and Orange counties would be entitled to 20,200 machines.

The gambling concerns would pay local and state governments 33% of their winnings. The sheriffs' letter pegs that sum at $2 billion annually; the legislative analyst's office estimated it to be $1 billion a year or more.

Blanas was first to endorse the measure late last year after his political consultant, David Townsend, presented it to him. Townsend is also one of the consultants working to win passage of the initiative. Blanas urged Baca to endorse it.

Rick Baedeker, president of Hollywood Park racetrack, said the endorsements were "very important" and helped solidify support for the campaign from Churchill Downs Co., the owner of Hollywood Park. The track could get 3,000 slot machines, and a card room on the grounds could get 1,700.

"Voters want to have confidence that this is a positive measure," Baedeker said. "These are names they're familiar with. They lend a great deal of credibility to it."

In 1998, as Baca sought to unseat Sheriff Sherman Block, he attacked the incumbent for taking donations from card rooms. But among Baca's donors with gambling interests, the biggest contributor is the Commerce Casino, which has 230 tables.

The club and its directors or employees have given Baca's campaigns $27,500 since 1998, campaign records show. He has received four-figure donations from the Bicycle Club in Bell Gardens, the Hawaiian Gardens Casino, Ocean's 11 in Oceanside, the Hustler Casino in Gardena — owned by Hustler magazine's Larry Flynt — and Magna Entertainment, which owns Santa Anita racetrack. Each would receive slot machines if the measure were approved and tribes rejected its requirements.

Baca's youth foundation also has received $1,000 from the Agua Caliente band, according to Lt. Bondel Golden, who oversees the organization's daily operations.

A Los Angeles County ordinance caps individual campaign donations at $1,000 a year. No such caps apply to contributions to nonprofit corporations such as the youth foundation.

And nonprofit corporations are not covered by the state's "sunshine" requirements, which force politicians to disclose the identities of donors to their campaigns.

"I welcome that money from the casinos," Baca said. "I will take any donation legally for the youth of Los Angeles County."

Baca told The Times last week that he would release a list of the foundation's donors, but he has not done so. Golden said the Commerce Casino has been the organization's third-largest donor since 2001.

The Commerce Casino could get 1,700 slot machines if the initiative became law. Those slots could generate $186 million a year, based on a projection by the legislative analyst's office that each machine would bring in about $300 a day.

Andrew Schneiderman, general counsel to the Commerce Casino, said Baca had "never linked" the casino's financial support to his endorsement. Schneiderman said he believed Baca was backing the initiative in part because the Commerce Casino is "an extremely clean operation that provides generous support for our cities and local causes."

An analysis by the initiative's proponents shows that, if card rooms and racetracks received the slot machines, law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles County would receive $195 million. The county would get a total of $634 million in gambling revenue, which would be shared with education-related programs and firefighting. Overall, law enforcement agencies statewide would receive almost $700 million.

Citing such numbers, the 8,000-member Assn. of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs is endorsing the initiative.

"I don't see how people can turn their backs on it," said Roy Burns, president of the deputies' union. "If it puts 1,300 deputies on the street, I consider it a huge plus for the citizens of Los Angeles County."

But many in law enforcement say casinos breed crime, and the money would come at too great a cost. The California Police Chiefs Assn. is opposing the initiative. While the state association of sheriffs is officially neutral, several sheriffs oppose it.

Alameda County Sheriff Charles Plummer said through a spokesman that the initiative was "ill-advised and doesn't solve anything."

In San Diego County, "we have enough gambling," said Sheriff Bill Kolender, who plans to campaign against the initiative and is a critic of tribal gambling as well. "More gaming is not going to make it better for California."

Noting that gambling is legal within certain limits and widely popular, Baca dismissed such critics. He cited statistics showing that crime had fallen in cities with card rooms, such as Commerce and Hawaiian Gardens.

[Six_of_One]

The point Andy makes about the limit on slot machines is key, I think. It mentions in the article that Commerce, for example, would be allowed 1700 machines. I can't figure in my head just how much space that will take up, but Commerce is a big place...it seems to me that they should still have plenty of room for poker.

[andyfox]

I don't know why, if they're going to have slot machines, which are a casino's biggest moneymaker, they just don't go all the way and have full casinos. I mean, they play 22 now, or somesuch blackjackish game, why not real blackjack? Set an area of the city or the county where the complexes can be built, and give Las Vegas a run for its money. A large portion of Vegas's gamblers comes from southern California anyway, why not keep those dollar here?

[TJSWAN]

Boris,

Saw the same petition, but this is a leverage move by the Governator to pressure indian tribes to agree to his new terms. Story here (http://casinocity.com/news/?ArticleId=48333&PlaceId=258&City=)

As far as the size issue, the newly updated Cache Creek Casino ( near Sacramento ) which has 1762 slots and 120 table games is 66,000 Sq. Ft. Commerce is what , about 90,000 ?? If so I figure very roughly that it takes about 20K to 30K of space for 1700 machines. Hopefully the indian tribes will agree to the new compacts.


Tim

[Six_of_One]

Full-scale casinos in Los Angeles would be the worst thing Vegas could imagine, I would guess. Personally I think it would be fine, but then personally I don't believe gambling should be illegal anywhere.

Still, even though I play here at the Bike all the time, I have to admit I get a thrill every time I head off to Vegas. I don't think that atmosphere could be duplicated here in LA.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know why, if they're going to have slot machines, which are a casino's biggest moneymaker, they just don't go all the way and have full casinos.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Why just nibble around the edges? LA should go whole hog and have big casinos. This will have a number of positive effects.

Reduce all the air and land traffic between LA and Las Vegas, City of ghostly hopes and simmering illusions, with the attendant reduction in pollution/transportation related deaths and traffic congestion.

Be a big boast to the economy by keeping money at home

Tens of millions of people in the LA basin will spend all their waking hours in a throbbing frenzy by hop, skip, and jumping from movie screens, to TV screens, to slot machine screens ever pursuing the unreality and dreamscape of invented hopes and witless illusions. The mindless masses; forever pushing buttons and watching whirling wheels spin, in addition to living like zombies encapsulated in a sweet chimera, slobbering and drooling over whatever new pointless images are conjured up in front of them by a slavish and moronic media, will reveal that LA is truly – The Only Real Paradise on earth.

This is what the people want. This is what the people deserve. And this what the people should get.

I am all in for this.

-Zeno

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
My sense is that some of the casinos will specialize in poker, just as in Vegas.

[/ QUOTE ]

What casinos in Vegas specialize in poker?

[Clarkmeister]

Here's the deal. 1,700 slots is a LOT of slots. The Mirage, by comparison, has about 2,100.

I don't know the sq. footages of most of the California Casinos, but I know they aren't huge, with the possible exception of Commerce (if you add in the 2nd floor). 1,700 slots would take up about 51,000 sq ft. of gaming space. Having been to Hustler, Normandie, Hawaiian Gardens and the Bike, I doubt any of those are significantly larger than that. Hollywood Park could probabaly keep the poker intact since they have more space, but it would likely be a dramatic cut in all the other places, even Commerce.

[Six_of_One]

I didn't realize 1700 slots would take up so much space. For some reason, I would have guessed a casino like the Mirage would have a lot more than 2100...I would have been way off.

I think in the short-term, if slots are allowed, it could very well result in fewer available poker tables...in the long-term, though, the casinos will do whatever it takes to expand, since it would be a very safe investment of their money due to the well-established customer base.

[Ray Zee]

slots would take away most poker space at least in the short term. but long term they would still have lots of games. but the biggest live ones would lose most in the slots so the average game would be much worse. and with the high rake might become unplayable. with rakes going up, the future of poker as a viable way to make money goes down. only those that choose or are capable of playing higher stakes at a winning level will survive the expenses.

[andyfox]

Bad wording. Some casinos will still try to cater to the poker players. Like the Mirage and Bellagio, that is, where poker is not just an afterthought.