Questions About Raw & Uncut

[MyTheory 0]

I know that Caesar's is owned by Harrah's. I work for Harrah's. I also know that Binion's is NOT owned by Harrah's anymore. It was sold last year to a small corporation that took over the operations. That's why the final table isn't held there anymore, not to mention that Harrah's thought it was a "logistical nightmare" to move the final day there. As far as "why aren't other casinos having televised tournaments?" I can tell you that it would hardly be a conspiracy. None of the casinos here NEED to have a televised tournament to bring in revenues but, I'm sure they would welcome it. However, having a televised tournament would only bring a temporary revenue stream for as long as the tournament was going on and the extra influx of players to the poker room wouldn't be enough for a casino to really care. The percentage of cash flow from slots is much much higher than all the table games in a casino combined. Considering that most cardrooms in town are low stakes affairs, publicity would really all there would be to gain in the long run and we all know that no venue here really needs it. To say that all the casinos are conspiring is pretty bold. Smaller companies here have to be constantly worried about being taken over like MirageCorp. was a few years ago. They do everything they can to bring revenue in. The fact is, it's hard to compete with the extremely large entities that are Harrah's/WSOP, MGM/Mirage and WPT (although WPT has apparently yet to report any profit). Starting a new poker tour would also be a major business venture that would require large amounts of capital. Personally, I don't think that anyone wants to put up those monies simply because they don't want to try and compete with the WPT and WSOP. The WSOP has been around for 36 years now. The field this year was 8442 (give or take a few). The WPT is growing exponentially. How do you even compete with that? I think a start up, at this point, would be moot. All the companies do around here is fight for money. That's why it's Vegas. Good thing for us there is enough money to go around. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue with you. I agree with the seven when it comes to the release but, not the anti-trust. Imagine a start up that was going to try and come into the market against microsoft? Or a new soft drink company that was going to try and compete on a mass scale with Pepsi or Coke? I know it's not really the same thing but it's a decent example of what I'm talking about.Again, I agree with you on the release. I do not think it is, in any way, right to ask someone to sign away their likeness just for a chance to play in some tournament. I didn't know about Lipscomb's injunction though. I do hope something can be done about that, although, I think it is going to prove difficult because of good ole' Steve Lipscomb's high priced attorney status. I also agree with the "price fixing" and the WPT's action of giving players zero compensation. I only don't agree with the monopolization of the casinos, that's all. Thanks for your posts though! They've been extremely informative.