Question for poker room managers, floormen, and dealers

[youtalkfunny]

For years, cardrooms have used tournaments as "loss-leaders"--daily events that didn't drop enough to cover the expenses involved (labor, drink comps, etc), but got people to come into the room--and hope that some of the players decide to stick around and give the live games some action.

My question: is this marketing tool obsolete?

In my opinion, tournaments aren't drawing ANYBODY to the rooms, except for players who will play in tournaments ONLY.

Those of you who work in a poker room know that the following exchange is common:

PLAYER: (walks in) You guys having a tournament today?
BRUSH: Sorry, it started an hour ago. You're too late for that. But I have a seat available in every game, at every limit imaginable...
PLAYER: No thanks. When's the next tournament?

At the room where I currently work, we have daily tournaments that draw anywhere from 40-100 players, and I swear that they don't do ANYTHING to enhance the bottom line (the drop). Players get busted from the tourney, and they're running out the door, on to the next tourney.

I've suggested to my superiors that if we're going to hold these events, let's do it for profit! Instead of offering a $20+5 (plus re-buys) event, let's make it $20+20! Why provide dealers, floormen, tourney directors, chips, tables, surviellance, security, and FREE DRINKS for $5 per head?

Again, maybe this was a great idea one time in the past, but the explosion of tournament poker has made this "loss-leader" stuff obsolete, IMO.

To the shock of absolutely no one, my suggestions have fallen on deaf ears. The toughest policies to change are the ones that make bosses say, "But that's the way we've ALWAYS done it!"

One last thing: if you're thinking "...but the tourneys draw players onto the property, so they must be a good thing," I would counter that if these players won't give you any action in the POKER ROOM, that would make the odds astronomical that they'd give you any action anywhere else in the casino.

Opinions?

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
For years, cardrooms have used tournaments as "loss-leaders"--daily events that didn't drop enough to cover the expenses involved (labor, drink comps, etc), but got people to come into the room--and hope that some of the players decide to stick around and give the live games some action.

My question: is this marketing tool obsolete?

In my opinion, tournaments aren't drawing ANYBODY to the rooms, except for players who will play in tournaments ONLY.

Those of you who work in a poker room know that the following exchange is common:

PLAYER: (walks in) You guys having a tournament today?
BRUSH: Sorry, it started an hour ago. You're too late for that. But I have a seat available in every game, at every limit imaginable...
PLAYER: No thanks. When's the next tournament?

At the room where I currently work, we have daily tournaments that draw anywhere from 40-100 players, and I swear that they don't do ANYTHING to enhance the bottom line (the drop). Players get busted from the tourney, and they're running out the door, on to the next tourney.

I've suggested to my superiors that if we're going to hold these events, let's do it for profit! Instead of offering a $20+5 (plus re-buys) event, let's make it $20+20! Why provide dealers, floormen, tourney directors, chips, tables, surviellance, security, and FREE DRINKS for $5 per head?

Again, maybe this was a great idea one time in the past, but the explosion of tournament poker has made this "loss-leader" stuff obsolete, IMO.

To the shock of absolutely no one, my suggestions have fallen on deaf ears. The toughest policies to change are the ones that make bosses say, "But that's the way we've ALWAYS done it!"

One last thing: if you're thinking "...but the tourneys draw players onto the property, so they must be a good thing," I would counter that if these players won't give you any action in the POKER ROOM, that would make the odds astronomical that they'd give you any action anywhere else in the casino.

Opinions?

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry but you'd get no one to play if it was a $20+20 tourney, what are you [censored] nuts

[thetman]

Tournaments can be a nice change of pace for the regular players.

[TwoNiner]

Why not being even more forward thinking and make it a $20+$50 entry fee?

[cardcounter0]

I agree. Some one ought to track your tourney players (give a special card or something good for a free prize) and actually calculate and see how much business they give the casino. Bet that would open some eyes.

I play in a local semi-home type game. They put on tourneys and 100 people show up, eat up all the free food and drink, and 1 to 2 hours later when the tourney is over, leave.

That leaves the 15-20 or so regulars, giving the house 90% of its profit in rake playing a couple of ring games, sitting around the entire rest of the night living off the crumbs the tourney players left.

So then the house decides to charge for drinks, so they can afford to provide more food. So then the tourney players all show up and gorge themselves like pigs, and the regular all-night ring players pay for drinks the rest of the night.

Sometimes the damm Tourney structure is like a big crap shoot anyways. A few times, the winner was determined in a half hour. I mean, if you can't sit in an uncomfortable chair for a couple of hours and do nothing but fold hand after hand, you aren't a real poker player.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
sorry but you'd get no one to play if it was a $20+20 tourney, what are you [censored] nuts

[/ QUOTE ]

Wanna bet?

One of those daily tournaments currently has the following structure:

$20+5, one $20 re-buy, and an optional $10 re-buy. The $10 goes to the tournament staff.

That makes it, essentially, a $40+15 event. 37% of the money gets raked out, and split between the house and the dealers.

This tournament draws 50-70 players each week, and in almost every case, we're turning people away.

We've had $200+20, plus $20 for the dealers, with space for 200 players, and filled it.

I just typed up a flyer for a series of tournaments we're going to hold at the end of the month, pending approval from the Gaming Commission: $20 to the house, $20 to the dealers, zero to the prize pool. One $50 re-buy available (only the re-buy goes to the prize pool, which the house has guaranteed to be at least $10,000).

In big print, we put on this flyer, "LIMITED TO 240 PLAYERS".

If you think I'm [censored] nuts for expecting a big turnout, I'll gladly lay a price on "over 100 players", and take even money on "over 160".

Oh yeah, one more thing: if you're right, and "no one would play" in such an event, my response would be, "GOOD! We were losing money on those events anyways, with no return on that money." Am I wrong?

[TomCollins]

Here's an idea. Give priority to people who are playing in a ring game 2 hours before the tournament. Let them sign up for the tournament first. Guarantee anyone seated a seat. And liimt the number of entries so that it will sell out. Then gradually increase the entries as more people camp out a seat in the ring game. Easy profit!

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion, tournaments aren't drawing ANYBODY to the rooms, except for players who will play in tournaments ONLY

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree - I started out as a lowly scum sucking free drink quafing tournament only player.

But then this little light kept going off in my head saying "If you play some ring, then you won't always have a negative EV experience when you bust out of a tournament early" so I started playing some 3/6. Now I'm not only a tournament players by a regular 10/20 or 20/40 player as well.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
I started out as a lowly scum sucking free drink quafing tournament only player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't put words in my mouth. I never intended to imply that I thought tourney players were scum, nor free-loaders.

My point is that it doesn't make good business sense to spend a lot of money to attract these players who do nothing to help the bottom line.

I already knew you PLAYERS would feel the way you do. That's why this thread is titled "Question for poker room managers, floormen, and dealers".

[Rams_Law]

Two questions: First what room are we talking about? I truly want to avoid it. Do they players know $20/head is going to the dealers or do you still lean on the winners for tokes?

Second, I disagree. When Foxwoods and Mohegan ran their early bird weekend tourneys I was in the room earlier than I would otherwise have been because of the tourney. After the tourney, I was in the ring games around noon, earlier than I would have been had the tourney not happened. I tried to get a seat before the tourney to get on the reseating list, so I could get back into the ring games quickly; most morning touney players were horrible and washed out right back into the 3/6-4/8. I'd even considered not bothering with the tourney and just cleaning us the scraps.

Since Mohegan closed the poker room and Foxwoods cancelled their weekend tourneys, I've been there once. I got there at 4 PM, spent three hours in the poker room before meeting my party for dinner. Net loss to the house.

Do tourney players stay for the ring games? There is also value in getting those players who do stay into the room earlier, and attracting better players in that feed on the crowd. Your mileage may vary (apparently does).