Do B&M rooms generate any kind of substantial profit for the casinos??

[squeek12]

I don't know how many times my BJ playing friend has convinced me against my will to play BJ with him after a poker session (especially after a winning session).

[Clarkmeister]

Substantial? No. People are wildly overestimating the revenue/table. 24/7 isn't even close to how most tables run. An average table in an average room is going to do about $700-800/day. Not chump change, but unless you are in Nevada, gaming taxes are generally in the 20-30% range and that's on the gross. $500/day net per table with a lot of overhead. Compare that to slots which average (depending on the market) about $200/day, have way less overhead, and take up about 1/10th the space.

[canis582]

[ QUOTE ]
$3 a hand 30 hands an hour. $90 an hour and they only pay minimum wage to the dealer. Why wouldnt they profit from this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Opportunity cost, yo.

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
I once asked a dealer this question and he told me if the casino could have it their way they would make the whole casino just 25 cent slots. Those are the biggest moneymaker in terms of space to profit margin. But they have to have some variety.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a flaw in this reasoning - replacing poker tables with slots only increases total revenue if the new slots get the same amount of play as the existing slots.

I'd say most casinos already have "enough" slots. By this I mean that adding more slots wouldn't result in more total slot play, because the occupancy of the existing slots is low enough that very rarely is anyone who wants to play slots unable to find an appropriate machine. To put this another way, I think most casinos would get close to zero net increase in slot play per slot machine added at this point.

Casinos have customers who play slots, customers who play table games, and customers who play poker. They are not always (or even usually) convertible. Replacing the poker room and table games with slots would be a losing proposition for most casinos (at least those that already have slots).
Just my opinion of course.

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
Replacing the poker room and table games with slots would be a losing proposition for most casinos (at least those that already have slots).
Just my opinion of course.


[/ QUOTE ]

In the present market this is true. As more poeple are exposed to poker the more the casino wants these palyers in their casino. In the past many casino did not want poker becasue they did not want poker players in their casino. Many in the industry feel that poker players will only play other games if they kno whow to cheat or somehow have the best of it.

[TimTimSalabim]

Slots make the most money per square foot by far, however, nobody would go to a casino that only had slots. So the table games are sort of the "loss leader" (or more accurately "smaller win leader") that draws people in, but before they leave most people drop a subtantial amount into the slots. And now, poker is becoming the hot table game that serves this purpose, used to be primarily blackjack and craps.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
$3 a hand 30 hands an hour. $90 an hour and they only pay minimum wage to the dealer. Why wouldnt they profit from this?

[/ QUOTE ]

And to the cocktail server.

And the bartender.

The cashier and the brush make a little more.

The floorman makes even more.

And they all want health insurance benefits.

And those players want comp drinks. In some places, food.

Advertising, insurance, mortgage, gaming license, the light bill.....there is substantially more than the dealer's salary to consider.

[Bremen]

[ QUOTE ]
Many in the industry feel that poker players will only play other games if they ... somehow have the best of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would certainly fit that category. I'm sure many others here would as well. So I don't see how those in the industry would be wrong :0)

[afish]

I think an AC poker table probably pulls in close to what a $25 table game pulls in. I know I pay almost twice as much in time ($14/hr at 20-40) as a $25 blackjack player playing basic strategy would be expected to lose in an hour (60 hands/hour*25*.005=$7.50 expected loss).

What most people in this thread are ignoring (I think one or two posts hit on it) is the concept of marginal value. The question is not whether the average slot returns more than a poker table. The question is what would be the marginal value of an additional slot machine. Take the Borgata, for example. Let's say the average machine takes in $100 a day. Would slot revenues be expected to go up by $100 if the casino added another machine in the basement? No way. There are always machines available, so adding machines in the basement is not going to increase slot win much (if at all). Therefore, the marginal value of poker tables in the basement is almost certainly higher than the marginal value of more slots down there.

Amazingly, even some casino management forget about this concept. A couple of years ago, the Sands decided that they were making more money from slots than table games, so they pulled out most of the table games. Surprise, surprise -- revenues plunged. The marginal value of the table games was higher than the marginal value of additional slot machines.

[canis582]

[ QUOTE ]
Slots make the most money per square foot by far, however, nobody would go to a casino that only had slots . So the table games are sort of the "loss leader" (or more accurately "smaller win leader") that draws people in, but before they leave most people drop a subtantial amount into the slots. And now, poker is becoming the hot table game that serves this purpose, used to be primarily blackjack and craps.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are going to try slot machine/race tracks in PA. ITS GONNA SUCK! But hopefully it opens the door for card rooms, but probobly not.