Link to the Washington Times article confirming:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-strip-buck-t/
Caesars will be next. Sad.
Link to the Washington Times article confirming:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-strip-buck-t/
Caesars will be next. Sad.
Last edited by Daredevil; 01-15-2016 at 12:13 PM.
I bet Caesars will take a wait-and-see attitude with this.
They're probably hoping that this backfires and they end up receiving some of MGM's business as a result.
Caesars will probably pull the same stunt they did with resort fees.
They'll heavily market the free parking aspect, for a time. Then they'll quietly switch to pay parking when they see how much money MGM is making off of it.
This has been in the works for months, MGM resorts is just the first, by summer all the hotels will be charging for parking.
If these hotel executives think real hard they could charge for a lot more shit.
MGM Grand room rate: $85
Resort Fee: $30
VIP Parking: $20
Valet Parking: $15
Regular Parking: $10
Bellman Fee: $20
Drink Tab Fee: $10
Dining Tab Fee: $15
Show Ticket Fee: $12
Toilet Paper Fee: $24
Bottled Water: $10
Fee Wifi (dialup speed only)
High Speed Internet: $25 a day
Wait until the WSOP this year.
At the Rio, outside parking lot it will cost $10 per day. Inside parking lot $15 per day.
This is a mistake.
Some are comparing this situation to resort fees about 5 years ago -- something that angered people initially, but eventually all major properties adopted, and now it's standard.
But that's a poor comparison.
Resort fees in Vegas are a trick to make the room show up cheaper in online listings.
In the old, non-resort-fee format, an $80 room would be listed on Expedia (or whatever) for $80.
In the new era of resort fees, an $80 room would be listed as $50, and you are paying the other $30 as a resort fee, which is stated in the fine print.
So the resort fees weren't really making the room more expensive. It was just being broken down differently.
CET tried to resist this, and in fact had a lengthy "no resort fees" ad campaign. However, the business they gained from the lack of resort fees was not enough to make up for the business they lost by falsely showing up as higher priced in online listings.
So New York New York was $90 with a $20 resort fee ($110 total), Planet Hollywood was $100 with no resort fee, and yet New York New York would show up cheaper in the listings.
CET then took a, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" attitude at that point, and out came their resort fees.
So how is parking different?
The charge for parking is for ALL guests (excluding those with high-tier players club cards), so this isn't about hidden fees for the hotel and its listings online.
It's just a money grab, pure and simple. And it's a HUGE departure from the way Vegas has always treated parking. Even the downtown "pay for parking" lots have had validation for decades. The strip did away with that nonsense, and made parking completely free.
People aren't going to take to this well. I imagine that you're just going to see many people avoiding MGM properties altogether, rather than parking at a nearby lot and walking over. After all, a casino is a casino, and once you're already avoiding the MGM lot and parking somewhere else, you might as well just stay where you are.
I don't believe the $10/car they will collect will offset the loss of business. They are very much underestimating how people in Vegas spend money. Vegas is an impulse town. You walk into a casino, see a game you like, and decide to gamble. Or you decide to eat at a restaurant which grabs your attention. Or maybe buy tickets to a show you see is playing tonight. Sure, there are people who specifically plan things, but Vegas properties have always made lots of money from people who just walk in, start browsing, and then start spending. Charging for parking in Vegas would be like a Louis Vuitton store charging people $10 to come in and browse the merchandise. While the $10 wouldn't be much for anyone who can afford a Louis Vuitton purse, the simple annoyance factor of the charge would keep out a lot of browsers who would have otherwise bought something.
There's another factor that I don't see anyone discussing anywhere -- the inconvenience of the $10 fee. These Vegas lots are huge, with lots of cars coming and going. This $10 fee (presumably collected on the way out) will create backups when exiting, especially on busy nights. Can you imagine leaving Bellagio on Saturday night and spending 30 minutes in a pay-for-parking line? This might very well happen, and that will be another factor causing issues.
Keep in mind that, on my New Years trip to Caesars, the lot was already so busy that there was a small jam getting out, EVEN WITH NO FEES BEING CHARGED. Can you imagine if money was collected from each and every person leaving? Would be a nightmare.
I predict this will backfire, and will be rolled back.
CET and others clearly see it my way, and are just waiting this one out, hoping it backfires on MGM. If somehow this works out and MGM gains from it, then yes, we will see the other properties adopt it. But I think there will be too much resistance to this.
Resort fees were at least artificial, and hotel guests could at least rationalize that they were getting something for it (internet, gym, etc).
The parking will be seen as pure greed, and I think the backlash will be strong.
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
There is so much truth to this. The percentage of people that either go into a casino with no intention of spending money but do has to be ridiculously high. There are a number of factors involved from impulse control, but one of the biggest factors is you just dont feel like going anywhere else. Once you are at the casino, it is a pain in the ass (and can be expensive) to get to another casino so you generally stay where you are.
Also, great point about the payment line. How many times have we been at the airport or some other place and you have to wait in line to pay to get out of the lot? Either there isnt enough attendants or the person in front of you cant figure out how to use the automated machine. The Bellagio is a perfect example as it is one of the hardest properties to leave even when taking a cab! Now you add these machines and it is going to be a nightmare.
:freelewfather
We don't know all the details. By no means is this necessarily bad.
I'm confused by this post.
Not necessarily bad for whom?
It's definitely bad for the customer. I see some MGM apologists saying, "This will be a good thing. It will unclog the lots, make it easier to find parking, allow funding for parking improvements...."
To that I say BULLSHIT.
First off, there is not an issue at any MGM properties with large numbers of people parking there and going elsewhere. So those cars you see in the lot are likely cars of people actually visiting the property.
Second, people are dreaming if they believe that the revenue from the parking will go into any kind of improvements.
At best, the lot will be less congested due to people simply avoiding going to MGM properties and/or parking elsewhere, but that lack of congestion will not be an overall time gain, as you will have the new hassle when leaving regarding waiting in line to pay/exit.
This is definitely a NEGATIVE for the customer.
Now, for MGM perhaps it will be a positive, revenue-wise, but I don't believe it. I think there will be a consumer rebellion against this, especially if other major properties in town are still offering free parking.
If I were the CEO of Caesars right now, I'd be licking my chops and thinking to myself, "Maybe we finally caught a break!"
I will join the wild speculation and say that the price for parking will remain $0 for short-term patrons who are actually gambling and spending. For overnight guests with cars, the price for parking is inelastic and it is MGM's corporate obligation to capture that profit. Less congestion from lookie-loos and freeloaders in the garage and on the floor makes for a better experience for me and for you.
If they're wrong, they will pay for it. That's the beauty of the free market, right? Ronald Reagan and shit, fuck yeah!
How often, would someone who is driving out to one of the casinos from out of town, ask if there is a charge for parking, first?
50% of the time?
In Atlantic City you pay for parking on your way in.
"You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole; you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."
If there is significantly less foot traffic, they will immediately reverse their decision. So I think your dreams of walking through MGM properties unhindered by crowds of freeloaders isn't realistic -- at least not for the long term.
I also heard that the $10 will be for EVERYONE, aside from people with high-tier cards, and perhaps gamblers who get validated. Perhaps the restaurants might also validate.
But the days of "Let's meet at Bellagio and figure out what to do" are going to be over.
Is the charge not per day?
If it's on the way in, people could stay for multiple days and just pay once.
Nope. Just get you going in. Stay as long as you like. But when you come back in you pay again. I assume if you're staying at the hotel the policy is different.Is the charge not per day?
If it's on the way in, people could stay for multiple days and just pay once.
"You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole; you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."
Oh that's what he's thinking alright, but not for the reason you think. He's thinking he caught a break because another company is the first to introduce it, now Caesars can do it, and not look like the bad guy.I'm confused by this post.
Not necessarily bad for whom?
It's definitely bad for the customer. I see some MGM apologists saying, "This will be a good thing. It will unclog the lots, make it easier to find parking, allow funding for parking improvements...."
To that I say BULLSHIT.
First off, there is not an issue at any MGM properties with large numbers of people parking there and going elsewhere. So those cars you see in the lot are likely cars of people actually visiting the property.
Second, people are dreaming if they believe that the revenue from the parking will go into any kind of improvements.
At best, the lot will be less congested due to people simply avoiding going to MGM properties and/or parking elsewhere, but that lack of congestion will not be an overall time gain, as you will have the new hassle when leaving regarding waiting in line to pay/exit.
This is definitely a NEGATIVE for the customer.
Now, for MGM perhaps it will be a positive, revenue-wise, but I don't believe it. I think there will be a consumer rebellion against this, especially if other major properties in town are still offering free parking.
If I were the CEO of Caesars right now, I'd be licking my chops and thinking to myself, "Maybe we finally caught a break!"
The strip is mostly a duopoly, with MGM making this move it gives Caesars license to do the same. Just like the resort fees, they will see the income generated and feel like they are missing out.
Plus think about this, there is no reason, with free parking, to park at one casino with the intention of patronizing at another. Let's use two casinos as an example, I'm picking these two but it can be any two owned by either of the two big companies. In this case we'll call Caesars Palace casino "A" and Bellagio casino "B".
Right now there no reason to park at A with the intention of going to B. But jump to when paid parking happens, people start thinking "Well let's just park at A and walk over to B". Soon everyone has the same idea. Now casino A's lot is a jam packed cluster fuck every night, with half the people not even going to the property.
And the people who did/do go to the property, have just had their experience made much worse by not being able to find parking all the time, extra traffic coming in from the road/leaving etc. And all because people who aren't giving casino A a dime, are using their lot. And you think Caesars will at that point say "oh well, we're winning the PR war so parking stays free". Not bloody likely.
I guess free parking is over.
The only person who will get free parking at MGM resort properties is this fucking guy...
Daredevil, I'm glad you are posting again, but I have to disagree.
First off, there is one and only one MGM property near the clump of Caesars properties, and that's Bellagio. So there isn't going to be the chronic problem of all the MGM customers filling up the Caesars property lots.
But let's take a look at Bellagio. Is it likely that a large number of its visitors will avoid the Bellagio lot and instead park at Caesars, thus jamming up the Caesars lot?
Probably not, for several reasons:
1) Bellagio is a high-end property. A large number of people visiting Bellagio will take the attitude of, "It's just $10, I'm about to gamble hundreds/thousands/tens of thousands", and not find it worth it to park across the street. Remember, parking in one property's lot and walking over to another property is not trivial! It's a long walk through the parking lot, then through the casino, then out to the street, and then you usually have to take an indirect route to the property you want to visit, due to the "overhead crosswalk" situation at strip intersections. So it's a pain in the ass.
2) Caesars has a big capacity in their parking structure. Even on busy New Years weekend, I did not have trouble finding a spot at any time. In fact, I have never seen the Caesars lot full.
3) Paris actually appears closer to Bellagio to most people than Caesars, so a fair number of people will park there, as well. That's another huge lot which I have never seen completely filled.
4) In order to make an impact on the Caesars/Paris parking situation, there would have to be a mass number of people parking in those lots and crossing over to Bellagio. I don't see mass numbers of people doing this. Most will either choose to pay the $10 or simply avoid Bellagio altogether. As I said before, unless you have a specific destination in mind within the Bellagio, to most people a casino is just a casino, and can easily be replaced.
Also, Caesars may not mind Bellagio people parking in their lot and walking over, because this will require walking through their own casino, and many of those people might just choose to stay where they are and forget about the walk to Bellagio.
Now, with that said, am I ruling out Caesars copying MGM and rolling out their own parking charge a few months later? No. I will concede that is quite possible.
But I have a feeling that right now, Caesars is looking at MGM like they're morons, and are expecting to gain some MGM customers over this, with the contingency plan of copying MGM if it seems they are generating extra revenue without losing many customers.
My wife and I are staying at Aria in May, we always rent a car as we are semi-regulars and know the area well so this will impact us soon. I know this parking charge is going to annoy me, even though the details are not yet concrete and the money amount is likely small.
How much per day? How much hassle getting in/out? Does it cover all MGM properties with the one charge? There is probably a workaround like using mlife or myvegas points or complaining to a casino host but it sucks having to do these extra steps. I also don't like the loss of freedom to drive wherever you want and spend as much or as little time gambling, or drop in for a meal or show.
So depending on the experience this trip we may avoid MGM properties in the future assuming it doesn't spead to the other places we stay. I would have stayed somewhere else this trip but both venetian and wynn were like $300 per night while we got a casino rate at Aria for less than half that.
Lets assume I can't get around it easily. We could park at Crystals that expensive mall thing next door apparently that is going to be free and take the monorail thing back to Aria. But since we also pay for the rental car, you may get less use from it or be tempted to give up the car entirely and use uber or taxi to get around.
Parking is one reason I avoid downtown, and I think helped Atlantic City fail faster. Most tourists are going to find this out the hard way too so I would guess they lose money long term but make extra money for a few months while building negative vibes.
It seems unlikely that they're going to allow the shopping malls to be such a big and obvious loophole. It's more convenient as it is to park at Mandalay Place if you're just going to the MB casino.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
