Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Resort fees were first imposed in 2004, the went right through the 2008 recession, and stayed clear through the growth spurt after that. That seems plenty stabile to me. Yes, some people don't like them. But the casino companies know there customers. The want the people who'll pay the fees in the casino, and don't really care if the ones who won't don't come, because they know they won't make much money off the latter. The resort fees are just not going away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by equid0x
Good question. I don't track casino earnings. Even if they did go up, throwing away long term stability for short term gains is silly. Its been what the bean counters have been doing since the 90s and look at all the very long term corps that have gone under over the last 30 years - companies that nobody thought would be going anywhere.
Its just like all the sales of Chinese goods. Prices never went down, companies simply raked in huge profits. They gutted household brands like RCA, Zenith, Kitchen-Aid, etc by abusing the good reputation of those brands to sell people garbage at inflated prices. Now, we have a trade war and a public that insists on free shipping and returns because so much of what they buy is junk. We have old reputable companies that have gone by the wayside. We have a general distrust of Chinese made goods and even some production has been moved back to the states.
So I guess where the casinos are concerned, they did quite well milking conventioners and well-off jetsetters while pricing out their original client base or worse yet, basically telling them to get lost. Now, Vegas has lost the conventions and the locals who could have helped the casinos get things moving again now have a bad taste in their mouth and have already moved on to other venues. Will they come back?
Premium Outlet Mall Downtown charges for parking, but has a large sign hanging off their garage "locals free parking"
Ya just the North Premium Outlets. It's $7 for the day. Free for locals. Fashion show mall is free. The Forums at Caesars are also free with validation. Not sure about the rest along the Las Vegas Boulevard.
If Malls start charging for parking here I'd never shop there again and I'd buy everything online instead. Except for at Ross and TJMaxx and single stand alone stores like that.
Ya just the North Premium Outlets. It's $7 for the day. Free for locals. Fashion show mall is free. The Forums at Caesars are also free with validation. Not sure about the rest along the Las Vegas Boulevard.
If Malls start charging for parking here I'd never shop there again and I'd buy everything online instead. Except for at Ross and TJMaxx and single stand alone stores like that.
Tropicana is still free parking as is Miracle Mile shops parking.
I feel like parking at Circus Circus was free but it's been awhile since I've
used it so maybe not anymore. Free for locals at North Premium? How do they
check that, driver's license?
I have the second tier member card with Caesars...was Platinum but I
think they just changed all the names again because I don't see Gold
listed anymore. (Gold being lowest then Platinum and then Diamond
the second highest with Seven Seas being Premium Diamond).
We weren't charged for parking in any of their garages and that literally
covered half of the Strip.
Tropicana is still free parking as is Miracle Mile shops parking.
I feel like parking at Circus Circus was free but it's been awhile since I've
used it so maybe not anymore. Free for locals at North Premium? How do they
check that, driver's license?
I have the second tier member card with Caesars...was Platinum but I
think they just changed all the names again because I don't see Gold
listed anymore. (Gold being lowest then Platinum and then Diamond
the second highest with Seven Seas being Premium Diamond).
We weren't charged for parking in any of their garages and that literally
covered half of the Strip.
Oh that's right. They have free parking for gamblers. I don't gamble. It doesn't do anything for me.
At the North Premium Outlets they have a machine that scans the barcode on your DL.
I don't remember hearing all the hoopla about maximizing profits for shareholders until the 2000s. The companies are only bound to shareholders by what is in the corporate charter. If the charter doesn't mention maximizing profits then they do not have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to do so.
As I stated earlier, accountants shouldn't be allowed to run companies. We did not used to allow accountants to operate companies in a vacuum. At one point in time, the goal of most companies was not to maximize profits, it was to secure a steady, long-term revenue stream. It seems clear to me after 20 years of companies maximizing profits that there are some pretty serious flaws in that model. We're on economic crash number 3 in the last 20 years.
I totally understand your sentiment; however, this is the capitalistic system we have and the goal of most public companies is to make as much money as possible for the shareholders.
I totally understand your sentiment; however, this is the capitalistic system we have and the goal of most public companies is to make as much money as possible for the shareholders.
"Board of directors have a fiduciary duty to exercise due care in how they manage a corporation's affairs and also have the duty of loyalty and obedience to the corporation. A fiduciary duty means that both directors and officers handle their powers only for the collective benefit of the corporation and its stockholders."
That's pretty much the case with for-profit entities. My study of railroad history shows that the B&O railroad kept their dividends high, 6%, during the mid-late 1800s. One of those Directors from the mid 1800s owned a lot of stock and when he died his $6M fortune endowed a medical school in his name, thus the nation has the Johns Hopkins University, Medical School and Hospital System. Directors have a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to protect the value of the corporation and its stock.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 05-12-2020 at 11:08 AM..
Premium Outlet Mall Downtown charges for parking, but has a large sign hanging off their garage "locals free parking"
They didn't always have paid parking. It's a tourist trap anyways. Nothing "outlet" about the goods they carry, just marketing spin.
To the point, though, there is no reason casinos could just not charge locals. They didn't when they first started paid parking but I knew some accountant would be drooling over that additional revenue. Never underestimate just how greedy and cheap an accountant can be.
Resort fees were first imposed in 2004, the went right through the 2008 recession, and stayed clear through the growth spurt after that. That seems plenty stabile to me. Yes, some people don't like them. But the casino companies know there customers. The want the people who'll pay the fees in the casino, and don't really care if the ones who won't don't come, because they know they won't make much money off the latter. The resort fees are just not going away.
I disagree. Nobody likes resort fees and never did. They'd rather those fees were wrapped into the room price. It's a classic bait and switch. They advertise $120/night rooms, the guest comes out and stays for a week, then at checkout they get the bill and SURPRISE! That $120/night room was really $170/night.
I don't have Stockholm Syndrome for the casinos and won't defend their sleezy corporate business practices. The idea that there is a "certain type" of hotel guest the properties want comes across as a bit snooty and pompous to me. High rollers aren't staying at Excalibur, or NYNY, Circus-Circus, Treasure Island, etc.
Your statement also corroborates what I was saying about "maximizing profits." Resort fees didn't go in until '04. It seems that many of these properties were getting along just fine for decades without the resort fees. It's a MoneyGrab.
They purport that the fees cover the on-site gym, wifi, etc but the fees are not online with actual costs nor are the markups reasonable and that's exactly what irks people about them. Additionally, if they were truly fees then they should be waivable by waiving use of those services, but you can't they're compulsory.
Some years back there was a court case about such charges tacked on to business services and I believe the fees were ruled to be illegal. I'm surprised nobody has ever taken the hotels to task for the practice. Remember when the phone companies were advertising cheap service and then adding hidden fees for voicemail, 411, usf charges, connection fees, payment fees, etc etc so the bill was really double what was advertised?
Face it, everything your saying is either incorrect or irrelevant. Resort fees have been a fact of life in Vegas for 15+ years, and excepting periods of major, worldwide economic dropouts (which were not casino/resorts industry specific issues), visitation, revenues, and profits all rose significantly. So, really, the resort fees have been a resounding success for the casinos. If the fleas don't want to pay them, and won't come, the casinos aren't losing anything, and could care less.
As far as shareholders demanding maximum value, the shareholders OWN the company, they can (and in the case of large shareholder often do) fire and hire management. The companies exist for the benefit of the shareholders. The companies need to keep their customers happy enough keep them doing business with the company (and note I mean REAL customers, who are willing to pay what it takes to provide the product or service, not wannabe customers who can't afford to or are unwilling to do so. It's the latter that are pissed oft. But as I said above, no one who matters cares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by equid0x
I disagree. Nobody likes resort fees and never did. They'd rather those fees were wrapped into the room price. It's a classic bait and switch. They advertise $120/night rooms, the guest comes out and stays for a week, then at checkout they get the bill and SURPRISE! That $120/night room was really $170/night.
I don't have Stockholm Syndrome for the casinos and won't defend their sleezy corporate business practices. The idea that there is a "certain type" of hotel guest the properties want comes across as a bit snooty and pompous to me. High rollers aren't staying at Excalibur, or NYNY, Circus-Circus, Treasure Island, etc.
Your statement also corroborates what I was saying about "maximizing profits." Resort fees didn't go in until '04. It seems that many of these properties were getting along just fine for decades without the resort fees. It's a MoneyGrab.
They purport that the fees cover the on-site gym, wifi, etc but the fees are not online with actual costs nor are the markups reasonable and that's exactly what irks people about them. Additionally, if they were truly fees then they should be waivable by waiving use of those services, but you can't they're compulsory.
Some years back there was a court case about such charges tacked on to business services and I believe the fees were ruled to be illegal. I'm surprised nobody has ever taken the hotels to task for the practice. Remember when the phone companies were advertising cheap service and then adding hidden fees for voicemail, 411, usf charges, connection fees, payment fees, etc etc so the bill was really double what was advertised?
The resort fee's are an insult to your intelligence. They say it's to cover amenities. Did they think we wouldn't notice the day resort fee's were enacted that the room rate we were paying did not drop by that much? Of course they didn't. It's the old itemization scam. Either charge an all in one fee or break them out. But if you break them out, make them optional, otherwise it's for no other reason then to charge more without offering anything more.
I really hope people remember what the resorts thought of them when they could pick and choose what clientele was up to their standard. They don't offer THAT much more then the locals casino's offer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
