Poker is a necessary annoyance for casino executives.

[Bishop22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I for one would never regularly play these electronic casino poker games unless they were the only game offered within a 50 mile radius of my house.
I like live poker with cards and chips and that is what I want when I play live poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. Not only that, casinos are regulated in NJ so that there is an increase in employment. My opinion is that state government of NJ will never allow the dealers to be replaced by machines.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pokertek machines were already approved by the NJCC.

[laikeze]

But there will still be a place for dealers.

Halligan says casinos could charge a higher fee for the option of a live dealer similar to banks that have charged customers for using tellers instead of automated services such as ATMs


When you read the last line of the article it's pretty much in the hands of the casinos. When I first remember ATM's like 20 years ago,some people refused to deal with them and conitnued using the tellers. Since then the banks have slowly adjusted the mindest of the vast majority of the public. Now, pretty much all ATM's charge fees if your not a member of their bank, some banks even charge you if you withdrawal your money from another banks ATM, therefore getting double charged. (even at non fee ATM's my Bank Charges me).
Try having a paper check mailed to your home from your employer, instead of Direct Deposit, you run into roadblocks, such as banks charging you fees to have an account UNLESS you have direct deposit. With the younger workforce comfortable with ATMS and Direct Deposits and virtually no experience with bank tellers, it's completely in the Banks favor.
Now the casinos will do the same thing, those that really like the dealers and real chips will either have to adjust or be forced into to paying more for the dealer. Now, at first there will be alot of real dealer poker players, but slowly, they will decline until the vast majority of players will be playing these PokerTek like tables.
And the thing is, there isn't going to be any real reason for playing with a real dealer, players will soon realize that no tips and more hands per hour = more money. And to tell you the truth younger, more naive players may be quicker to try the electronic tables as they don;t have to 'interact' with a real person, since they are ATM and Direct Deposit comfortable.
This is just my opinion of how it may work out and for one enjoy real dealers and real chips.

[DeadMoneyWalking]

[ QUOTE ]

Try having a paper check mailed to your home from your employer, instead of Direct Deposit, you run into roadblocks, such as banks charging you fees to have an account UNLESS you have direct deposit. With the younger workforce comfortable with ATMS and Direct Deposits and virtually no experience with bank tellers, it's completely in the Banks favor.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why it's a [censored] pain in the ass the way they control us and are allowed to force direct deposit on people who don't want it. Our only recourse is to complain as often as possible.

[DayTripping]

Good point about the blackjack Al. I was at O'sheas recently and there was a game being dealt out of a SHOE that paid 6:5 blackjack. No gimmick at all, the dealers weren't dressed like [censored] or anything. Just a regular BJ game except 6:5 payout. I think a few years from now there will be no more 3:2 tables in Vegas at all.