|
Question in black type - Answer from our Readers in blue type
#1. Several older Las Vegas casinos have
been knocked down or imploded over the past years, Dunes, Aladdin,
Hacienda, Sands, Landmark. Soon the Desert
Inn will be the next casino to be replaced with a modern structure.
Are you in favor of removing the old casinos with the new mega resort
casinos? Why or Why not?
* The rooms, etc.
at the Dunes, et al were really getting old and it was time to replace.
But, I saw the Desert Inn last year and it had just been renovated and
looked gorgeous. Why throw away history when it is still beautiful. Marvine
Locklin
* While we have
recently begun visiting Las Vegas on a regular basis, we find the older
resorts more enjoyable. The mega resorts are interesting to visit, we
prefer to stay at other places. Jeff M Riggs
* As a
long-time Las Vegas resident, I miss most of the old hotels that were
imploded. They held memories of people and days that will never
return. However, I can understand the need to attract visitors by
offering up-to-date accommodations and attractions. I can't say the change
is better for residents, as it's brought increased traffic and a faster
pace of life that wasn't here years ago. PSMOORE
* As far as I'm
concerned they spend way too much money on the new casinos. Once you've
seen one they are all basically the same. The real gambler could care less
what the casino looks like from the outside or inside, that's why I stay
downtown. For the first time Vegas tourist the new casinos give them
something to do and see. Kris
* It's an
economical issue. Yes, tear down if the mgmt, clientele and bells and
whistles are obsolete. Otherwise, renovate the main floor and make the 2nd
floor into a prize casino catch. Alan Lee Judson
* If the property
is in need of major repairs, may as well tear it down. Don't
understand why they would tear down Desert Inn. It appears to be in good
condition and is pretty classy. Wish it had more slot machines but
otherwise it seems like a nice place. I like the Westward Ho because of
its reasonable rates and the convenience of parking near the rooms. It's
also convenient for walking to other nearby casinos. I would hope that
they would not consider demolishing and rebuilding. Would prefer that they
remodel and/or maintain the rooms. They seem to be doing a good job in
that respect. The newer bigger casinos are nice to visit but don't like
staying in the high rise buildings and having to depend on valet parking
or walking long distances to parking lots. Also the new casinos don't seem
to pay out very well, particularly the Paris. Dave Mraz
* Wrecking the old
casinos to build new ones means more money spent by vacationers. The price
is always higher to stay at the new hotels. Too bad they just don't keep
the old ones up to date. We are finding it more difficult every year to
scrape up the money for our Vegas vacation. Even though the new hotels are
gorgeous, there's no place for the little guy anymore. Not like the old
days. We are coming out in August and are staying at the oldest hotel on
the strip ( New Frontier ) and hope it's going to be satisfactory. Just
can't afford to stay at the new hotels. Too bad ! Karen V Bujnoski
* Replacing
casinos is very good , but must be tempered with common sense. I always go
back to see the statues in Caesars and the old Aladdin's had the best
lounge show in town. hayspurple
* Many of the old
are of much better construction then the new. Some older casino's have a
certain warmth about them, by contrast with the new ones. You felt
comfortable being there. The new are mostly a lot of highly expensive
gimmicks. Nice the first time around, but then nothing. This is all paid
for by us regular visitors. The slots are so tight, they are starting to
squeak. They are slowly killing the goose that lays the golden
eggs. zwillow
*
We like the older ones best when we visit Las Vegas. We visit three to
four times a year for the past 12 years. The new ones are nice to see from
the outside but many look cheap when you get inside. Keep the old ones if
they can be restored or updated like the Sahara. We like what was done
with the downtown area. After one visit to some of the new casinos we go
back to the older ones to gamble and stay. Like one of the readers said
the new rooms are over priced for what you get. James R Robertson
* Well not the DI
!!! Why? It's just been remodeled. The others were at least in dire
need of upgrading. Marilyn Turner
*
Hello. The more they open mega casino the less a small time gambler
like me wants to visit Vegas. I am treated nice but not as
if I'm important or really need because the person behind me might
be a high roller, or at lest a higher player. also the restaurant
and room prices have gone to a level that reflect a casino interested in
making money on ever thing , and comp high roller forget little people .
all thing change but after thirty year of visiting LV. I like it
better when they were happy to see me instead of rating me as a person to
paying attention to , or smiling and move away from me. I was in New
York, New York last year and went into a fast food court order a
coffee to walk with .i almost fainted when they charge $2.00 for and 8oz
striform cup .well you get my point. A regular guy. Smhfcmdcnt
* You used to have
class now all there is is glitz. I don't know I don't think there is
anything wrong with taking something special and making it more special
instead of demolishing. Diana
* In cases like
the El Rancho, I am in favor of tearing down the old casino to make way
for the new. In the case of the Desert Inn, I would not understand doing
that. Why did they spend so much money for the facelift and addition just
to tear it all down? At first I was upset when I learned that the
Sands was going to be imploded. Now that I see the new Venetian, I think
that was a good move. Rosemary Schmit
* No. The Desert
Inn has recently under gone a very nice renovation. Leave the present
structure alone and add to it in the back. Jack Arlen
* No! This is
history. Some of the old ones are so neat and have seen so much. If only
the walls could talk. Jde1122
* I much prefer
the older, smaller casinos. The new ones are just to big and involve to
much walking to get 'any where'. And they are to far apart in most
cases. The Hacienda was my favorite. but now I stay at
Fitzgerald's which is the size I like. Over the years I have
used MGM, Rio, Xcaliber, Circus, Rivera, Treasure Island, etc. and I feel
lost in them. wd4bum
* My husband and I
have been coming out to Vegas for the past 30 years. While, we have
enjoyed the older places, there is a lot to be said for the new ones. We
like to see hotels and casinos kept up, clean and inviting. Some of
the older places have become run down and seem to be dark and uninviting.
The new places are clean, light, airy and inviting with something for
every one. Since I am the gambler in the family, my husband needs things
to do while I am at the casino. The newer places have shops, wonderful
pools, spas, and things for him to do. Too bad we can't have the
illusion of old with advantages of the new. All in all we still love
Vegas. No matter what they do to it!! Mr. and Mrs. C. of Texas
* Not in favor,
the Desert Inn still looks good and has been maintained quite well from
what I have seen. I can't see tearing down to rebuild and charge me more
to stay at a "new" overpriced hotel!!! Bryce Dixon
* While it's tough
to see the old favorites disappear, I'm always amazed at the new ones that
keep coming along. I've been visiting Vegas since I was 10 years old (some
40+ years) and have seen lots of them come and go. I must admit I LOVE the
new hotels and always look forward with enthusiasm and eagerness until
they open. As for the old digs, I like the neon museum since
the signs are a lot of what I remember best. Perhaps a bigger, better
promoted display of the signs would help off-set some of the sense of loss
we feel when it's time for the building to go. Kathie Sucidlo
* Tear down the
old casinos - This makes way for newer and finer accommodations and
attracts more and more families and makes each trip a new adventure with
more and more to see and do. Bruce May
* I think
part of the call to Vegas is the lure of the nostalgic past. A lot of
people want to see the old lights and hotels that they remember from
postcards and past vacations. Everything doesn't have to be
mega! Steven Armbrister
* I wish
there would keep some of them; it's too late for most. They would have
been a testament to the history of Las Vegas, architecture & of
casinos. I think it is important to keep a balance of new & old.
Another problem with all the new casinos being built is the price of
staying there. The room rates keep going higher out of our price range! We
are middle class, our wages aren't rising at the same pace as prices in
Vegas; pretty soon we may be priced out of being able to vacation
there. Marlyce
* I kind of
like the older properties because they generally have lower room rates.
Take the Plaza for instance. Certainly not a thing of splendor. But when I
stay in Las Vegas the only time I spend in the room is when I am sleeping
so it does fine for me. Roger Clough
* I think a few of
the old need to stay. For instance, old Las Vegas, The Fremont Experience,
would make Las Vegas incomplete were it to go. As far as the other old
ones, keep some of them. They are the only ones where the paybacks on
slots are any good. The new casinos are tight they have a lot of bills to
pay while the older casinos have been paid for years ago. Keep some of the
good old ones. dwarfel
* Definitely NOT!
Everything in Las Vegas does NOT have to be about money - it should be
about the consumer. The customer needs to be a person NOT a number! What
about the history of Las Vegas? And since it's always been thought of as
part of the WEST - what has happened to that notion? The only hotel that
still maintains part of its western heritage is the Frontier (which I
heard was to be torn down, but that is now on hold - thank heavens!!!). I
have stayed there for the past 13 years - and the people know me - I am
NOT a high roller, but I am a good tipper and I get the service I pay for.
The employees know me as a person - not as Room #1234 and that homey
feeling is the reason I keep coming back and also refer my friends. I have
a few friends that could afford (very easily) to stay at Mandalay Bay or
one of the other higher priced hotels, but they in turn choose to stay at
the Frontier because of the fact that they are treated as Mr. SO & SO
- not just another number! It's more of a people oriented hotel and part
of the Las Vegas history - I stayed there the year I turned 21 - ended up
talking with Frank Sinatra Jr. - a memory I'll never forget - and that's
been over 30 years ago! Don't let history go by the wayside for the
almighty dollar - it's not worth it. Individuals are always worth more in
the long run. Leave what's left of Las Vegas' history alone - preserve it
while you still can - pictures can only do so much! And that's my
two cents - for what it's worth! Carla Hall
* There
is definitely a place for the old to exist alongside the new. There is so
much history behind places like the Desert Inn and Sands. The new places
will never have the charisma of the old casinos. I watched a program last
night on the Rat Pack - pure nostalgia. I remember very happy times at the
Sands. We are staying at the Desert Inn this July and it is sad that it is
likely the last time. I think Vegas will lose out in the end with all mega
resorts, kids everywhere and sky high prices. Elaine Brotchie England UK
|
