get rid of smoking in the casino

[ReneeFLL]

15 hours ago, TheHawk1 said:

There are 5 states that explicitly allow smoking in bars and casinos, Florida being one of them.  Every time I go to Florida, it's like being in a time warp where people in big cities like Miami and Tampa still smoke in bars. I would hardly blame the cruise lines as the only group behind the times.

What bars have you been in that allowed smoking indoors?

 

2 hours ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

The only places you can smoke indoors in FL are the Native American Indian casinos and some stand alone bars and even some of them have converted to non-smoking. I live in Miami-Dade County and haven’t been or heard of any smoking indoor bars or casinos in Miami. Florida passed the Florida Clean Indoor Air Act (FCIAA) in 1985. Where in Miami did you smoke indoors?  If there are any smoking places left they won’t be in business very much longer especially since the passing of the ban of e-cigarettes and vapping in 2019.

Same here except in Broward County. No smoking indoors that I've seen.

[livingonthebeach]

Just now, ReneeFLL said:

What bars have you been in that allowed smoking indoors?

 

Same here except in Broward County. No smoking indoors that I've seen.

 

The Hard Rock Casino is the only place in Broward that I know of and none of my friends want to go there because as soon as you walk in there is a cloud of smoke.  It's disgusting and I'm sure they are losing customers because of it.  

[florida eagle]

11 hours ago, davekathy said:

Disagree. Speaking only for myself, and a x-smoker I didn't stupidly chose to smoke. As a baby boomer I chose to smoke as it was the cool thing to do being under age (seemed like everyone smoked). I enjoyed smoking (26 years) but quit (over 30 years ago) because I wanted to. Saw too many people attached to oxygen. But I will admit, after I quit smoking I realized how bad the stench on my person including my breath was from cigarettes. I have no problem if others smoke (their choice for what ever the reason) but where they smoke is the issue. 

If we have smoked in our lives and then stop do we have the right to become self righteous on it to others? And we know that there is an affect on others. Cruise ships let this go on in casinos because of gambling. Even if some will smoke in there to not gamble. Vices like drinking, which I still do is okay.

[ReneeFLL]

1 minute ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

The Hard Rock Casino is the only place in Broward that I know of and none of my friends want to go there because as soon as you walk in there is a cloud of smoke.  It's disgusting and I'm sure they are losing customers because of it.  

Forgot about that one. I don't really consider it a regular bar because the American Indians have a different set of rules. 👎

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, florida eagle said:

If we have smoked in our lives and then stop do we have the right to become self righteous on it to others? And we know that there is an affect on others. Cruise ships let this go on in casinos because of gambling. Even if some will smoke in there to not gamble. Vices like drinking, which I still do is okay.

 

Hopefully, they'll get smart and not allow people just to sit there to just smoke and not gamble.  That is certainly not improving the bottom line and taking away from the revenue that non-smokers would spend there by allowing the taking up of machines by smoking people not gambling.  You don't have to be a smoker or non-smoker to realize this. 

[livingonthebeach]

3 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

Forgot about that one. I don't really consider it a regular bar because the American Indians have a different set of rules. 👎

 

True, they have sovereign immunity and can allow smoking.  All the other casinos and gaming areas are non-smoking. I don't know of any stand alone bars near me that allow smoking and I don't want to know 'cuz I would never go there anyway.

[BND]

15 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

But how many people book a cruise so they can gamble? Royal knows the answer to that question and we don't. 

That doesn't really matter because they know for a fact they make money off of people gambling, whether that's the reason they book or it's just something they do a few times while onboard.  How much money they make from gambling is easily measurable.  How much they make from smokers isn't.

 

I also just saw new stats, the number of smokers has dropped to just below 14%.  The 15% I quoted earlier was from a few years ago.  Watching the smokers onboard the cruises we've been on, the number of people in the smoking area has steadily decreased over the last 16 years.  I highly doubt the maybe 15% of cruisers who smoke onboard gamble more than the other 85%.  

 

I want to know where all these smokers live and work. I worked in a building that at any one time had over 300 people in it and I only occasionally saw one person smoking outside in the smoking area (yes one area was designated).  None of the 50 people on our permanent staff smoked and out of the visitors/temporary staff we had as I  said I occasionally saw one person.  Prior to that I was in a building with a couple thousand people and out of three different large groups I worked in, I only knew of one or two smokers in each group of well over 100 people.   I also haven't seen a single person in my neighborhood of 76 homes smoking either, not out on their decks or while walking.  It's something that is extremely rare here.  Of course, the fact is, the higher the education level, the less likely someone is to smoke.

[sparks1093]

1 hour ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

I believe it's drinkers that spend more -- that explains the free drinks to the high rollers.  You don't see them doling out any cigarettes.  They definitely need to go back to the good 'ole drawing board and do more studies when cruising comes back and see if they lose any high gambling smokers and not just people that use the casino as a smoking lounge, as many have pointed out,.  Could turn out they don't need to allow smoking in any indoor venues anymore. 

I am sure that this is something under constant study and if they start missing revenue targets they'll think about changes. 

[livingonthebeach]

Another thing people have not touched upon, is that the younger generation smokes much less than the older crowd.  If Royal wants to lure more young families, they will do well to consider banning smoking from the casinos. 

 

The casino in the Park MGM's in Las Vegas has gone nonsmoking.  This development will show others (including cruise ships) that is possible to ban smoking and still make a profit.  The Park said they reopened non-smoking because their clients asked for it. 

 

Times have definitely changed and many people do not find it acceptable to allow smoking indoors any longer.  Indoor smoking is no longer a social norm and the percentage of smokers has significantly gone down in the CV19 era.  Smoking and CV19 do not mix very well. 

[sparks1093]

27 minutes ago, BND said:

That doesn't really matter because they know for a fact they make money off of people gambling, whether that's the reason they book or it's just something they do a few times while onboard.  How much money they make from gambling is easily measurable.  How much they make from smokers isn't.

 

I also just saw new stats, the number of smokers has dropped to just below 14%.  The 15% I quoted earlier was from a few years ago.  Watching the smokers onboard the cruises we've been on, the number of people in the smoking area has steadily decreased over the last 16 years.  I highly doubt the maybe 15% of cruisers who smoke onboard gamble more than the other 85%.  

 

I want to know where all these smokers live and work. I worked in a building that at any one time had over 300 people in it and I only occasionally saw one person smoking outside in the smoking area (yes one area was designated).  None of the 50 people on our permanent staff smoked and out of the visitors/temporary staff we had as I  said I occasionally saw one person.  Prior to that I was in a building with a couple thousand people and out of three different large groups I worked in, I only knew of one or two smokers in each group of well over 100 people.   I also haven't seen a single person in my neighborhood of 76 homes smoking either, not out on their decks or while walking.  It's something that is extremely rare here.  Of course, the fact is, the higher the education level, the less likely someone is to smoke.

Ah but they do have measurements. They have the observations of the pit bosses and also the daily take from each table/machine in the smoking area vs the nonsmoking area. They also know how many of their passengers smoke within an acceptable range and can extrapolate what percentage of them smoke. As long as the revenue targets are met they're unlikely to change.

[livingonthebeach]

2 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

Ah but they do have measurements. They have the observations of the pit bosses and also the daily take from each table/machine in the smoking area vs the nonsmoking area. They also know how many of their passengers smoke within an acceptable range and can extrapolate what percentage of them smoke. As long as the revenue targets are met they're unlikely to change.

 

What they don't know is how many non-smokers would go to the casinos and gamble if smoking were not permitted.  They have no clue and this is why they should have some ships or sailings with non-smoking casinos so they can compare this number and revenue to the number and revenue of ship casinos that allow smoking.  You keep stating that they have all the numbers but they don't and certainly not while CV19 - not until they do test sailings. Celebrity has kept their ship casinos non-smoking for a reason.  They haven't gone back to smoking for a reason and they must be making money or else smoking would return.  Royal should take its CV19 cues on its smoking policy from other places and cruise lines that have banned indoor smoking for everyone's good health -- especially the casino workers. 

[sparks1093]

11 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

What they don't know is how many non-smokers would go to the casinos and gamble if smoking were not permitted.  They have no clue and this is why they should have some ships or sailings with non-smoking casinos so they can compare this number and revenue to the number and revenue of ship casinos that allow smoking.  You keep stating that they have all the numbers but they don't and certainly not while CV19 - not until they do test sailings. Celebrity has kept their ship casinos non-smoking for a reason.  They haven't gone back to smoking for a reason and they must be making money or else smoking would return.  Royal should take its CV19 cues on its smoking policy from other places and cruise lines that have banned indoor smoking for everyone's good health -- especially the casino workers. 

And as long as they meet their revenue targets they don't care.

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, sparks1093 said:

And as long as they meet their revenue targets they don't care.

 

Very sad if this is true.  They may find out that the very people they are trying to target (young families) do not smoke and would spend their dollars in the casino if non-smoking.  It's hard to believe that there are still that many smoking-addicted-high-roller-problem-gamblers out there spending so much more in the casino than the majority of the population that don't smoke and those that enjoy a smokeless casino. 

[coffeebean]

2 hours ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Me too.  He wanted equal treatment and equal services for the unvaccinated. I don’t think he’ll interfere with cruises though - they bring much needed revenue to FL. 

The exact opposite has actually happened. Un-vaxxed people can get on most ships (just not NCL) but their experience will be severely hampered.

[livingonthebeach]

Just now, coffeebean said:

The exact opposite has actually happened. Un-vaxxed people can get on most ships (just not NCL) but their experience will be severely hampered.

 

Yes -- that indeed.  I imagine he will step out of the way for the cruise lines since they are different than land venues and require more health and safety protocols.  At least I hope so. 

[BirdTravels]

39 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Very sad if this is true.  They may find out that the very people they are trying to target (young families) do not smoke and would spend their dollars in the casino if non-smoking.  

Casino targets are typically not very young families. 

[livingonthebeach]

40 minutes ago, BirdTravels said:

Casino targets are typically not very young families. 

Royal is targeting more young families as passengers.  This is a non-smoking segment who would probably go to the casino as well as other non-smoking passengers if smoking were banned.  I for one would spend more time and money there - as I do on Celebrity. 

[sparks1093]

1 hour ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Very sad if this is true.  They may find out that the very people they are trying to target (young families) do not smoke and would spend their dollars in the casino if non-smoking.  It's hard to believe that there are still that many smoking-addicted-high-roller-problem-gamblers out there spending so much more in the casino than the majority of the population that don't smoke and those that enjoy a smokeless casino. 

I trust that Royal knows what's best for Royal and has considered every point raised here and then some. Evidently others don't trust them to know their own business. Put it in gambling terms. If they change the casino rules they might have nonsmokers spend more then smokers, they might make the same as when smoking was allowed, they might lose smoker's business to competitors and the revenue from nonsmoking gamblers doesn't make up the difference or they can maintain the status quo and earn what they have. Seems like doing nothing (right now) is the safest bet.

[livingonthebeach]

8 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

I trust that Royal knows what's best for Royal and has considered every point raised here and then some. Evidently others don't trust them to know their own business. Put it in gambling terms. If they change the casino rules they might have nonsmokers spend more then smokers, they might make the same as when smoking was allowed, they might lose smoker's business to competitors and the revenue from nonsmoking gamblers doesn't make up the difference or they can maintain the status quo and earn what they have. Seems like doing nothing (right now) is the safest bet.

 

If so, its a big mistake, IMO.  It's possible they may make last minute changes like they have for other health and safety protocols.  RCI could experiment with other variables such as free drinks for everyone while they are gambling and other incentives -- I bet that would more than make up for any lost revenue from the smokers and it wouldn't cost that much.  They did offer $1 mimosas on days and times there were not a lot of gamblers - they could make them free for a certain period of time to make up for any perceived loss of revenue. 

[OSUZorba]

3 hours ago, ReneeFLL said:

What bars have you been in that allowed smoking indoors?

 

Same here except in Broward County. No smoking indoors that I've seen.

The vast majority of bars in Oklahoma do, even places like Buffalo Wild Wings.

[sparks1093]

30 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

If so, its a big mistake, IMO.  It's possible they may make last minute changes like they have for other health and safety protocols.  RCI could experiment with other variables such as free drinks for everyone while they are gambling and other incentives -- I bet that would more than make up for any lost revenue from the smokers and it wouldn't cost that much.  They did offer $1 mimosas on days and times there were not a lot of gamblers - they could make them free for a certain period of time to make up for any perceived loss of revenue. 

Trouble is you are betting with Royal's money. I get it, you think it's a mistake. They think otherwise. Since it's their business they know best...for them.

[Tree_skier]

15 hours ago, davekathy said:

Disagree. Speaking only for myself, and a x-smoker I didn't stupidly chose to smoke. As a baby boomer I chose to smoke as it was the cool thing to do being under age (seemed like everyone smoked). I enjoyed smoking (26 years) but quit (over 30 years ago) because I wanted to. Saw too many people attached to oxygen. But I will admit, after I quit smoking I realized how bad the stench on my person including my breath was from cigarettes. I have no problem if others smoke (their choice for what ever the reason) but where they smoke is the issue. 

 

15 hours ago, Tippyton said:

Well stated from another ex.

Mega dittos 

[livingonthebeach]

9 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

Trouble is you are betting with Royal's money. I get it, you think it's a mistake. They think otherwise. Since it's their business they know best...for them.

 

Lots of businesses that have known best for them have ceased to exist. Corporations do and have made many mistakes. Royal is not immune.  If they allow smoking indoors while CV19 is lurking all around, they are not taking the health and safety protocols very seriously. 

[sparks1093]

9 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Lots of businesses that have known best for them have ceased to exist. Corporations do and have made many mistakes. Royal is not immune.  If they allow smoking indoors while CV19 is lurking all around, they are not taking the health and safety protocols very seriously. 

Then that's a consequence neither you nor I can prevent.

[OSUZorba]

9 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Lots of businesses that have known best for them have ceased to exist. Corporations do and have made many mistakes. Royal is not immune.  If they allow smoking indoors while CV19 is lurking all around, they are not taking the health and safety protocols very seriously. 

Yeah, around here we just heard doom in gloom, how no restaurant could ever stay in business without smoking. Then when they finally banned it, revenue shot up.