Recently, various articles have been discussing the recent tourism slump in Las Vegas. There are lots of various reasons being batted around for why this is happening – international boycotts, price gouging and fees, tariffs and economic fears.
The data showed more budget conscious travelers were the ones cutting back the most, with more affluent visitors continuing to come. Gaming revenue has been flat, indicating Vegas is doing more with less right now.
But recently we saw a wave of complaints from players at at least two (differently owned) Las Vegas casinos that their offers hadn’t been what they used to be, and were abstaining from visiting the establishment that had cut them back.
Awhile ago, we covered the study that found players would continue visiting if offers were cut, based on an experiment that took players getting $20 offers and putting some of them into different buckets getting either reduced offers of various amounts, or no offer at all.
The feedback we heard from players was they care – a lot. But the study asserted that players continued to show up with reduced offers. There was a dip when the offers were fully revoked, but not a massive one.
Players are also vocal about slots getting too volatile, but similarly data is showing that players tend to play the higher volatility slots more frequently. So what gives in this case?
Perhaps the study’s flaw was more so they focused on small offer amounts. Players getting larger offers would reasonably be expected to be bigger players, and if their offers were slashed, or at the very least not reflective of the play they gave like other casinos might offer for that play, they might get in trouble when players shun them in return.
I find myself being part of a great example of this. I for years had room comps, free play and food at a specific casino. About a year ago I stopped getting room comps, just small free play and food offers. My coin-in there has been consistent to up, yet the offers are down.
Hearing that others have had the same experience reinforces my belief that perhaps this casino isn’t for me anymore. Either they’re in pursuit of a larger player than I’m willing to be at their property (in part because the amenities I would want for that play are not ones they offer), or they’ve lost the plot on what an offer should look like.
Ever since the introduction of the players club, casino offers have been part of the deal. I use a players card so you have access to my play history, and you give me offers as a thank you for that data. Those offers get me back, you get more data, and the circle of life continues.
Over the years casinos have taken the step of slashing offers at the risk of scaring away players. When what is now Caesars Entertainment and was formerly Eldorado purchased the Tropicana property in Atlantic City, their first step was to heavily slash casino offers. The instant reaction was a wave of players who decided to no longer play there.
During a time where Las Vegas isn’t sure if this downturn is limited or more enduring, and in a market where competition is high, players are more likely to simply shift allegiances if they feel like they’re not being treated well. A casino that is on top of their player patterns and making sure their offers and outreach reflect that could benefit heavily during a longer downturn.
If the recent player feedback is any indication, as is visitation trends, players are feeling a bit of pressure, and therefore the casinos that are looking out for players a bit right now will likely be the most rewarded with visits and spend, especially when it comes to those on more of a budget.
