Companies spend billions of dollars in creating magnificent complexes, with fabulous works of art and some of the most impressive crystal and steel architecture of the modern era. The purpose of these excessive luxuries is to get people into the resorts, and I guess the executives of these casinos want to play their casino games.

If I am right, it puzzles me why the person in charge would spend so much money building and maintaining these facilities and then implementing operational protocols that save cents in operating costs but lose millions of dollars each year in lost game profits. In other words, the established protocols are counterproductive to the declared objective.

It is a good example of the phrase "penny wise, but dollar stupid".

Automation is an example of a counterproductive strategy;

The first example of how automation reduces profits is the Ticket-In Ticket-Out (TITO) aspect of slot machines that allows players to move freely from one machine to another, or from the slot machine to cash out Of the casino. Before the TITO machines dominated the market, players took their coins to the cashier, lined up, and exchanged their coins for cash. Now it's just a matter of inserting a ticket into the cash machine at the casino exit.

A player would spend more time on machines and play more before the introduction of TITO. Why? The reason is the predictability of human behavior. And because I went to medical school and studied human behavior, both in the classroom and in the classroom, I am in a unique position to explain why.

People are mostly impatient.

They want their needs and desires to be fulfilled immediately. When they finish playing, they want to withdraw money immediately and leave. TITO and automated payment machines streamline this process. The result is that the player spends less time in the casino. I have no idea why the casinos decided to implement this.

You cannot make money from people who play when they are not in the casino.

In its simplest form, TITO technology reduces the time value to the player; Not to the extent of other aspects of the operation, but the loss is still measurable. If a player brought $ 100 to the casino, before TITO would play and then take their coins to the cashier and exchange them for cash. The process would take much longer than simply going to a machine and putting a ticket in and getting your money. If they wanted to play a few different machines, the process would be repeated until their funds were exhausted or they wanted to leave. The point is that $ 100 would provide more value, in time, to the player.

The impatience of the players can also lead the player to play more. In some cases, a player may choose to play the funds instead of being online for several minutes to redeem a few dollars. However, it took a Herculean effort to get all game designers to agree on the technical aspects of the TITO application. I assure you that his intentions were not to benefit the player, but rather his own bottom line. By pushing this technology under the false appearance that is what players wanted, it made sure that every major casino upgrade their machines. That means more sales for them. These sales included both new slot machines and new cash machines. It's pretty easy to see why they wanted the TITO technology implemented.

Another example of automation killing benefits are kiosks where players can slip their player's card and see which promotions qualify, and ultimately redeem them. Companies that manufacture and sell this product market it as a replacement for an employee. At first glance, a company sees savings. A machine that replaces a person, and is cheaper, is basically an obvious move for any casino operations manager. That is until you begin to think how this affects the perception of casino players.

Casinos are social settings. It is recreation for adults, and during socializing recess, taking the human element out of the satisfaction equation derived from promotions is not associated with a person but a machine.

The kiosk removes any opportunity for a casino employee to achieve a personal relationship with a player. Many players, especially those in local casinos, tend to be older and are far from their families. Hence, it is likely that these clients will seek someone to fill that null relationship.

The casino-employee-player relationship must become more of a friendship. And people enjoy watching their friends. This approach is aligned with the general 80/20 business rule. This means that 80% of your income is derived from 20% of your customer base.

Giving a person a personalized reason for a player to return to his casino will increase the frequency with which he goes to his casino. One overlooked aspect of any business is people. And this is even more so in the entertainment industry. Think about this, If a company is valued at $ 100 million, but if you liquidated every tangible asset that the company owns, equal to $ 30 million. The other $ 70 million is people's equity.

Gambling companies should think of people as non-passive assets.

The last aspect of the automation that I will discuss that reduces the bottom line of a casino, is the automated promotion system. Too many times I've been playing in the casino and I've had a very bad session, in the course of 30 minutes I can lose $ 2500. When I order a dinner for two at the steak house or a buffet, the answer is "Sorry, the Computer did not let me. " This raises the question why would a casino spend money on an employee who has no role? Get rid of the host and spend that $ 45,000 a year on promotions for the player.

Even worse is when I earn $ 2500 and the hosts do not give me a dinner as a compliment. Here's an idea, keep the customer happy then at least you have a chance at getting the money back. As long as a player keeps playing the house has the advantage. When you apply a cent-wise approach, you upset the player until they leave and play elsewhere and give back their winnings to another casino.

Games on vending machines is the elimination of all human elements in a casino.

This is not a good idea, but casino executives would love nothing more than fully implement this strategy. For them, fewer employees means more income. If this were true, however, why do the incomes fall? If this were the case, why are fewer people playing casino games? If this were true why is it that the model city for casino games, Las Vegas, derives most of its revenue from non-gambling sources? To make money you need to have people in the casino, implement the human element, and give players what they want while playing.

It has worked before and will work again.