Topic Of The Week: The "old" or the "new" Las Vegas [Archive]

Toicat

06-18-2007, 05:55 AM

This is an easy one. The "OLD " Las Vegas by far. I miss the $2 steak at The Horseshoe along with single deck BJ and 10x craps. Too much BS now with themes and decor. A gambling hall ought to look like one!

With the evolution of Las Vegas, the traffic, congestion, air pollution, and loss of natural resources (water) has really taken a toll on this wonderful town. My last dig is that you have to leave town to play golf at anything near a reasonable greens fee.

On a more positive note, the shows are really in a class of thier own and I never get tired of seeing them.

Best to all and good luck at the tables !

John

:)

tryon4

06-18-2007, 05:56 AM

GREAT QUESTION

There is much to be said for each. Oh I do miss some of the "old" like the smaller casinos, more customer friendly, deals were easier to come by, the sound of the coins hitting the bin and with not as many entertainment decisions your choices were easier and the cost was much, much lower and less traffic
Ah but, The Fountains at Bellagio, Fremont Street Experiance, The beauty of Venetion, The Botanical Gardens at Bellagio, Roller Coasters, TITO, the quality of the buffets and so much to do in so little time keeps bringing us back.
So we will spilt the vote. My wife definitely likes the new better than the old and I lean towards the old (maybe because I am old!!!)

Randmark

06-18-2007, 05:57 AM

Definitely, the OLD. Much of the excitement is disappearing, especially with the building of condos on the strip. We miss seeing the headliners' names appearing on the billboards as you leave the airport, preparing you for an adventure you would never get in Kansas.

dreamcatcheril

06-18-2007, 06:07 AM

old old old.. old is better
vs
new being after 2000 as new.. how about new starting in 1985 with the Mirage and Wynn. Where every department had to turn a profit.

You didn't see many kids under 21 let alone a baby stroller

There has always been a varity of shows to see. You just didn't have to pay a left lung to see them.

Hotels were spread out, you took a cab to another hotel to go see the show you wanted to see if you even left the hotel at all. Why leave the hotel, it had it all.

There was always great places to eat with charm and character, now it's chiefs with fancy names over charging.

A room was a room ( what I refer to as the standard delux vegas room in all the hotels), as long as it didn't cost a lot, it was a good room. A room with a view of the strip, what's that and who cares. You didn't go to Vegas to look out a window

You went to Vegas to gamble

stevevarro

06-18-2007, 06:10 AM

The Old By far :D

The buffets were better, the casino incentives were better, the payoffs were better.

I love Las Vegas and still get there 3 or 4 times a hear, but if they are not careful they are going to take away all the reasons for traveling to Las Vegas.

The local casinos are easier to get to, the prices for meals are the same as Vegas and the pay off are just as bad, but they do offer some nice incentives if you are a member of their slot clubs, and I can go there without the expense of airline travel or hotel costs.

Beware Las Vegas of causing yourself to go the way of the dinosaurs :(

hhalligan

06-18-2007, 06:27 AM

OLD and NEW. Old because it was a much safer place to be. Old because it has become a corporate nightmare. New because I would miss the fountains at the B and the conservatory.

cindyinnj

06-18-2007, 06:39 AM

Such a hard question to answer!:eek: My mom liked the very old...60's & 70's. The earliest I've ever been to Vegas was 1997. I loved it then, and I love it now. I love the different themed casino/hotels along the strip and the carefree-ness of downtown, and restaurants in LV are amazing. I do hate the crowds and corporate rule of LV lately. As far as safety is concerned...it's still safer than NY or LA. The intimacy is just about gone.

Guess I have to answer...I say Old is better, but not 60's old...;)

vegasbabygirl

06-18-2007, 06:41 AM

By far what came before. What is there now is blandsville.

gayle

06-18-2007, 06:48 AM

The Old, pre MGM takeover, all the way.

Half the joy of Vegas was the unique sites that different Hotels offered, the almost Disneyland feel of the place.

MGM's desire to make every hotel the same is absurd, and will backfire on them in the end. I used to go to Vegas at least five times a year, now at most twice, and more likely once. It may lessen even more if the current trend continues, the "pull" just isn't there for me the way it used to be when everything was new, different, and exciting.

The only good thing I wil say about the "new" Vegas, is the number and increased quality of the shows.

SJkytn

06-18-2007, 06:54 AM

I prefer the old Las Vegas before the casinos had to keep a bunch of money hungry stockholders quiet. All the "good old boys" wanted was a place to launder money..:D I think the deals were better, the service was better, and the ambience was nicer. It didn't cost you an arm and a leg to see a top headliner show either.

wa8ckt

06-18-2007, 07:09 AM

I like parts of both!

For the "OLD", I miss the headliners (of course most have passed away), the smaller casinos, less traffic, dinner shows , much lower costs of everything, the suite and tie for shows and meals to make it seem more special, the many lounge shows, and the lack of the need for security at the airport (along with its smaller size).

For the "NEW", I do like the tram and seeing all the new casinos along with what a few Billion dollars can build! I'm glad they moved away from kid friendly back to the more adult nature (which it really was in the "OLD" Vegas). I hate seeing the distruction of some of my old favorites but guess I can't have it both ways. I didn't like to see corporations buying out all the single owner type casinos and bringing in all the "bean counters". Any price competition between casinos is going away with all the mergers.

I am so glad I was able to enjoy forty years of going to Las Vegas and experience the "OLD" and the "NEW"

Enjoy, John in Caro

BaysiderGene

06-18-2007, 07:17 AM

My wife Rosie and I like the old Vegas. We are dyed-in-the-wool gamblers first, tourists second. We are big fans of VP and Keno, and certain IGT slots. We used to go to LAS every year, starting in 1988, but we only spent one night there (in September 2003) since 1997, when we rented a car and drove up from Lauglin for the benefit of our son and his girlfriend.

In 1996, we treated Rosie's parents to an all-expenses-paid LAS vacation in honor of their golden anniversary. We got them re-married on the strip and stayed at the Fitz. It was their first time in a casino {they were transported Southern Baptists and very conservative}; but they thoroughly enjoyed themselves, and got to see the Fremont Street Experience. Unfortunately, they passed away not long after that trip.

LAS has slowly lost its gamblers' mecca raison d'etre. One example: most casinos have adopted very poor blackjack rules; only foolhardy tourists would play those games now. Poor pay schedules for other games, such as VP, dominate casinos, especially along the strip.

Taxi drivers gouge tourists at every opportunity. Dining costs many times what it once did. Benny Binion is turning over in his grave, as is Bugsy Siegel, and Bill Harrah. We don't know what Bob Stupak is doing now. Binion always said to give his customers good eats and a good gamble; now, you get neither.

With hundreds of casinos all over the country, why would any competent gambler go to LAS? We enjoyed the hustle and bustle of the massive tourist crowds for our first few trips, but not anymore. I hear that Sassy Sally's is gone now, but hustlers and pickpockets and crime are still rampant. We once made the mistake (April 1995) of walking the entire distance from the Strat (where we were Charter Members) to Fremont Street; we had to tred carefully through the seedy neighborhoods therein. We weren't accosted, but probably only because it was high noon and relatively cool.

We'll probably return to LAS, but only if we get fully comped by Harrah's (we're long-time Diamond members and stockholders). We wouldn't stay on the Strip unless fully-comped. Outside of that, we would prefer North LAS or Boulder Highway. Lauglin still offers what Benny Binion championed.

Strip casinos have abandoned the Binion policies and think only in terms of profits. Gamblers be damned!

We have never paid for Strip entertainment: we refuse to pay the extravagant charges. If we get comped for it, perhaps we'll see a show or two. The same goes for dining.

Instead of gouging tourists at every point, casino executives should be trying to revive some of Benny Binion's tenets.

Gene & Rosie S.
Bayside, WI 53217-176266

LittleBear

06-18-2007, 07:27 AM

I sooo liked the "old". The "new" just does not have the spark.

kidgarfield

06-18-2007, 07:37 AM

Vegas in the 90s was much better. More originality in shows, better table limits, more affordable food/rooms and more plentiful lounge acts rather than today's deafening and expensive nightclubs.

meldodds

06-18-2007, 07:45 AM

I guess we enjoy some of both. We certainly enjoyed the prices of the old and still stay downtown about 1/2 the time. We love the comfort of the new, favoring the Paris. You really feel special strolling the bricklines streets on the way to the elevator, which takes you to your room with a very comfortable bed, soaking tub and marbled bath. I still prefer to gamble downtown and when we are meeting a large group, it is easy to find each other under the canapy lights! It sort of scares us, with what is happening on such grand scale on the "strip" and we are not getting any younger!!! Hopefully we get to keep both worlds.:D

sandlind

06-18-2007, 07:51 AM

The Old...prices I Could Afford. I'd Win More Often. More Friendly. Didn't Take Long To Get From One Place To Another. Liked "dressing Up"

Boston_Bill

06-18-2007, 07:57 AM

I wish I could have experienced the days of the Rat Pack in the 60's. I loved the old Vegas before they thought being a family destination was a good idea.
I thought it was a horrible mistake. Now I'm not so sure what they are trying to do. I get the sense it's all about the high rollers, ultra lounges etc. I miss being able to afford a three night stay on a weekend.

Chump and BG

06-18-2007, 08:15 AM

Per Steve's definition for purposes of this topic, everything "Before" 2000 is "Old Vegas". All the changes which have occurred "After" 2000 are the "New Vegas". As a point of reference, here are the construction dates of many of the Strip hotel/casinos: Mirage-89, Excalibur-90, Luxor-93, Treasure Island-93, MGM-93, Freemont Street Experience-95, Monte Carlo-96, NYNY-97, Bellagio-98, Mandalay Bay-99, Venetian-99 and Paris-99. Obviously, everything that was construction from 89-99 was heavily themed. Since MGM's acquisition of the old Mirage Group in 2000, they have relentlessly attempted to reduce or eliminate the theming of all of the locations into a generic MGM business model. I love the question and will reply later but I noticed a bit of confusion over the datelines of the Strip properties.

flamingofun

06-18-2007, 08:23 AM

Have to say the Old. Just got back last week. The trend is towards the rich as middle America can't stay in those new hotels. Another trend is towards the 20 something. Who wins at the slots? no one. Tourists aren't as friendly, it's just lost that feel. We've paid those prices for shows yet know it's costly to produce those shows. Greed has taken over in every aspect, from taxi drivers to a $4 coke. City needs to clean up downtown again. Scarey people, we left after first show. We aren't going back to Vegas as often anymore. VIVA

Phantom

06-18-2007, 08:38 AM

The old. It's no fun anymore unless you're twentysomething. Way too many ultra lounges.

flamingofun

06-18-2007, 09:02 AM

You are right about those hotel dates Chump & BG. My first trip in 1992 was Excalibur. So lets refer to the new prices! We were priced out of our beloved Flamingo last week. But then, have we all bought gas or groceries lately?? We're doomed!! I still love Las Vegas.

Spieler

06-18-2007, 09:34 AM

I was winning a lot more in the olden times (1990's). Rooms were cheaper and airline costs were 30% cheaper. Of course that was pre 9/11 and the current gas prices. A lot of places were independently owned and there was a feeling of belonging and loyalty to "your" place. I really would liked to have seen Vegas in the 60's.

The new times have their advantages also. A lot more to see and do thanks to the newer hotels. Where else can you see a reasonable facsimile of the Eifel Tower without going to France?

Someone made a previous comment about the "tightening" and rule changes of games that I enjoy. I usually go several times a year, but that may change as the corporate monster gobbles up Strip.

YSinAppleton

06-18-2007, 09:41 AM

I am very mixed in what is my favorite. I loved "old" Las Vegas for the cheaper food, many nice lounges to have a drink and watch a free show, the different themes of the hotels were very exciting to see. I love the shows that they have on the strip now (LOVE, Mamma Mia, Mystere etc.). The only thing I really hate about Vegas today is that there are so many ultralounges and the strip seems to be overrun with 20 somethings. And I'm not saying that I don't like the 20 something crowd (four of my children are in that age group), it's just that I would feel very uncomfortable going to most of the lounges in the strip hotels now.

Dufferjoe

06-18-2007, 09:47 AM

Great question and the answer is you can enjoy both the old and new Las Vegas pretty easy. Of course, the Strip continues to develop and has a constant stream of new properties, each with the latest show technology. But the old Vegas still exists, although you have to look for it. We recently attended a great show at the Hilton featuring Diana Krall doing a lot of old Sinatra music and it was great. The downtown casinos along the Fremont Street Experience are terrific for a vintage Vegas experience. You can still play single deck black jack, low limit table games, good dining and some of the best free entertainment you will see anywhere, including free live concerts on the Fremont Street stages plus their light show. Recently we went to the El Cortez and saw the legendary owner Jackie Gaughan, sitting in at a $3 poker table. You don't see that on the Strip.

Hockey53

06-18-2007, 09:55 AM

As most have stated, the Old Vegas was alot more laid back in my opion and the food was less expensive but good. The atmosphere was less crowded and fun to be able to walk from one casino and play those old slots without any confusion on how the payouts worked. The rooms were more affordable on the Strip ,although the rooms downtown at some Casinos are still at a good price. Will be going out this Sept. to see what else has sprouted up since last September and also hopefully get some R&R.:)

dscs007

06-18-2007, 10:10 AM

I don't like the "new" Vegas. That being said, I really didn't start going to Vegas untill just about 10 years ago, so I don't have a lot to compare (i.e. old downtown and a lot of the older hotels ), but I sure do miss the 99cent ham steak and eggs, three or four dollar buffets, etc. In my opinion, Vegas is going to the accountants and setting themselves up for a fall. People aren't going to be able to afford the strip within a very few years. The "twentysomethings" won't be able to keep the strip afloat for long.

David

gerrybl

06-18-2007, 10:47 AM

I agree with the majority but disagree with the dates. I would consider old before the 90's when most of these mega casinos were built. I started going to Vegas with my Mom & Aunts in the mid 70's staying at Westward HO & Circus Circus. We always had a 2 or 3 br suite and never paid for it. The staff was friendlier and the food cheaper or even comped. It was always fun to see my Mom & Aunts "let their hair down" and really had fun and we always came home winners.

That said...I do enjoy the mega casinos but feel that with MGM/Mirage & Caesars/Harrah owning most of the casinos that the bottom line is more important. The staffs are not as friendly and the food is costly. I still go 2 or 3 times a year but will need to cut back as the cost including airfare is getting prohibitive. As I go to get away and gamble and not eat at the star chef's restaurants it is now beginning to be cheaper to go the the local casinos where the paybacks are better.:)

elsushi921

06-18-2007, 10:52 AM

I think the Old Vegas even before our age group started to go, was more exciting, with the Rat Pack era etc. Maybe living in NYC makes going to Vegas too much the same the way Vegas is now. In NYC everything is open late and people are out so it doesn't feel really different. I think the family destination was a bad idea and it should be saved for Disney. Vegas needs to be VEGAS again and hopefully that wil happen. We are all adults and don't need all the gimicks and themes, thats great in Disney as I said before. I'll still go and always love Vegas but bring back the old days I read about it and see in movies. Where is Bugsy Seigal when you need him??

cjm051

06-18-2007, 11:16 AM

I prefer the "old" vegas. I go to Vegas to gamble and that is why when I go I stay at places like Gold Coast, Orleans, Palace Station, Imperial Palace etc. These places still have the old time feel to them and provide the best bang for your buck.

The big resort casinos on the strip are fine to see and walk through but are way too expensive to eat, stay, or gamble at.

sawsman

06-18-2007, 11:17 AM

Old by a mile! Better deals, looser slots, better comps, better airfares, and better, cheaper buffetts.
Who can forget the old, better, and much cheaper (original ) Rio buffet. Great value and great food.

vegasmann

06-18-2007, 11:35 AM

Old Vegas without Question i have been going there since 1991 and totally miss the way vegas used to be Cheap Rooms and Cheap Food with good Shows at resoniable Prices with Drinks Included.

The Merges have caused nothing but Higher Price Rooms and made it very difficult for the Middle Class to stay there.

They Alsmost ruined vegas trying to make it a Disney land Resort and now looking to do the same especially with the Tearing down of Reasonable Hotels and making it all Luxury and Condos.

Middle class will have to look off the strip soon.

Any one thinking the merger of all these Hotels to just 2 major coorperations
would not cause the Rooms rates to soar were Sadly Mistaken.

Conniesusan

06-18-2007, 11:42 AM

Definitely the old. I hate having 2 corporations own almost the entire strip. Some of the places are so huge you have to walk inside for miles to get anywhere and then there are lines. No good. Bring back the old motels where you can drive your car right up to your room and they had music in the lounges all day and night.

jt3451

06-18-2007, 01:24 PM

I loved the old Vegas hands down. It was looser, pretty, with fresh air and great views. A great deal to pick from but not too much like the new vegas. Just when I think it can't get any bigger it does. Its way to big now, congested, dirty, and poor views. Plus the bridges to cross the street. Remember when you could just cross the street???
I just don't feel the same anymore going to vegas. There is too much going on andhow many slot machines can you have. Now its all about competition rather than just making it a nice experience. I would live to have the older vegas back later 80's early 90's that was totally enough for sure.
Hopefully someday someone will start a new vegas somewhere else!!

JohnR

06-18-2007, 01:29 PM

I miss the entertainers of the 'old' Las Vegas. Really don't think that today's entertainers, except for a few, can match the talents of the old! I love the 'new' Las Vegas's looks!

earleene

06-18-2007, 01:34 PM

The old for us. It was more exciting!!! and affordable. :cool:

CJN

06-18-2007, 02:03 PM

The Old Vegas had better (& cheaper) buffets; less expensive shows (plus you got a dinner with it!); slots paid off more often; it wasn't as crowded; there were no children; airfare was cheaper as well as hotel rooms; people used to dress up for dinner & a show. The New Vegas is more glamorous; I like the "tickets" from slots as opposed to coins. All in all, more "old" Vegas than "new" I guess was better.

CHAPPY1

06-18-2007, 03:27 PM

The Old, Been Going To Vegas For 30 Yrs, Can't Beat The Old Days, To Much Corporate Trimming, Corporate Just Wants Your Bucks,everthing Getting To High, Taxis,rooms, Even The Food,yea The Good Old Days, But They Have Come, Been & Went!!!!!

Sherry

06-18-2007, 03:41 PM

Oh by far the old Vegas. The crowds were less, winnings were much much better, didn't have to walk 2 or 3 blocks to cross Vegas Blvd. had cheaper places to eat, ah for the good ole' times. But do love Bellagio's fountains, this was a plus for Las Vegas. Sherry from MI.

Bill Schroeder

06-18-2007, 04:03 PM

I truly enjoyed the "Old Las Vegas". It was much less expensive to eat and drink and the rooms were far more reasonable. Pretty soon, Indian casinos and Atlantic city will look much better. Who do the corporations think will be able to afford to go to Vegas? Certainly not the avereage person. Bring back the old Vegas!

jrinct1

06-18-2007, 04:08 PM

O L D !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dmacw

06-18-2007, 04:37 PM

Excellent question. I have been going to vegas since 1972. Definately the old. No I'm not that old, lol. I don't need the mega resorts. I would rather have good gambling rooms, good headliners (that don't cost one weeks salary per ticket) and cheap food. Not into the club scene etc.

I go to gamble. I don't like the crowded streets, airports etc. They really are pricing themselves out. Taking all the fun out of it.

Jacob36

06-18-2007, 04:56 PM

I have to go with the majority on this one. OLD VEGAS ALL THE WAY! I used to go to Vegas 3 or 4 times a year, now once a year is enough. I am looking in to maybe a second trip this year, but to Laughlin and maybe drive up to Vegas for a day.

The new Vegas is all about get as much money out of the customers as possible.

Will keep going to Vegas as long as the free rooms last, when they are gone, there will be no good reason to go back.

Jacob

JMVegas5866

06-18-2007, 04:58 PM

I like old Vegas. Though my first trip to Vegas was only in 1993, I would still say old Vegas from doing the historic reasearch on Vegas and listening to interviews or speaking to some people who have grown up in Vegas as a kid in the 50s and 60s. I'm starting to lose interest in 'new' corporate Las Vegas. IMO Steve Wynn is the only success in new Vegas since he understands all about it as he grew up with Vegas as a kid. Though I also think the Sands Corporation and Boyds Gaming runs a decent business. All HET and MGM is interested in is increased profit$, buyout$, expan$ion, and domination. Those 2 companies have killed the Strip with their buyouts and merging. Society and current trends are ruining Vegas also, so you can't blame corparate Vegas 100% as long as people are buying what they are offering. Old Vegas was the best because it was simple, but yet still a class act. They catered to ALL.

irelandvegas

06-18-2007, 05:00 PM

If i must pick one or the other , i will say OLD> but heres my thoughts.
I cant recall the year of my first visit.(pre 1988 i think) Some HUGE world or casino world sign had JUST blown over on the strip, one of the things i remember. I stayed in a horrible hotel, as i was stunned back then at what Caesars had asked for a night. So , if Caesars is expensive, somehow i just went to a hooker motel across the way and watched rain run in under the door.... What was i thinking. I think i attempted to eat/visit at Circus Circus. Oh my. I was Stunned, by it all. Most was good, but i was broke.
It was amazing, I remember driving up under those port cochiers, WOW (sp.)
NEW, well i now can go and spend money. somehow that makes a huge difference. My wife and i have gone about seven times in seven years or so, stardust, Fl amigo, Hilton , and our current fav. Paris. We love to Dine, and will spend on that, a Big night out in Chicago can cost just as much as a strip celebrity chef joint on the strip, often MORE! Is 150 too much for a dinner, yes but not for us foodies. I cannot think of any other city that we can walk to that many four and five star restaurants and really enjoy the walk. They are in a desert, they serve a zillion a day, and often, its really really good food! Yes we go to shows, yes we like to a little pampered and NO we don't gamble much (about 50/day each)
I know fancy places cost money, my money. Your money. Back when Old Vegas was "all" gambling, you paid at the table. Economically , the "fellas" didn't run a loosing casino AND loose money on the food and beverage. Looking at some of the original Stardust buildings that were still in operation within the last 7 years, i have to say, they didn't spend your money on those places, concrete is cheap folks. Most of those places were not built much better than hotels/motels at the interstate off ramp.
After all that, im sure Old vegas had a charm and a welcome to it that was more personal, the Older the better i bet. I also really fear the Condo's and the "upscale" race that will leave midle classer's like me out.
Since may have said both, I will say my money now, restraunts now and facilities now, with the old Charm please. how do i get there?

judyqu

06-18-2007, 05:11 PM

Boy am I in the minority, but despite the fact that most of the resorts seem to be targeting the 20 and 30 somethings with all those excluisive clubs, and the fact that room rates are much higher, I like the way Las Vegas is different each and every time we visit which is usually 3-4 times a year. Am looking forward to the opening on the new Venetian tower later this year, Encore at Wynn in late 2008, and City Center a year after that.

sean

06-18-2007, 05:29 PM

The comps were much better. You also would not have all of these 20 something kids running around Vegas.

Speaking old Vegas. Joey the Clown Lombardos trial began today in Chicago

Kaystr1

06-18-2007, 05:41 PM

I am definitely in the minority here. I like the new, although I have nothing to compare it to. Only been going to Vegas since 2002 and love that each time we go there is something new. (we go twice a year)
I would like to have experienced the old, but was too young.

I know there are alot of "twentysomethings", but that's okay. Better than alot of small children that, I feel, really don't belong there. There are alot of ultralounges, but you don't have to go there, we never do.

I still get excited when we arrive and sad when we leave.

We are just middle class and always have our rooms and food comped. We love MGM Mirage, they have always treated us well and we have a choice at which hotel to stay at. Not always the same each trip. We do spend some money gambling, but nothing more than we would if we had to pay for our room. Airline prices are high, but so is everything else. Look at the price of gas these days! I still think it is quite reasonable for the amount of time you save (versus driving from the Midwest).

(Good Topic!!)

Fundytide

06-18-2007, 06:09 PM

This week's Topic Of The Week question is:

What did you like better, The old or the new Las Vegas?

Old can mean just about anything before all the hotels were bought up by the big companies.

New should refer to all the changes since 2000.

Steve

Old...the Sands, the Dunes, the sound of coins, the brass and red atmosphere of fun, excitement and a real casino was lots of fun....like the new theme casinos but now one is so much like the other...sterile with no risque feel to it.
Now, husband likes the new, so there you are...it's true though, the local casinos at home most times, pay much better and no flight to white knuckle about so, our annual trip is still on but doesn't seem as much fun...very tight slots the last two trips.....still, there's no place like Vegas!!

Flipdog

06-18-2007, 06:45 PM

The old. Vegas has become to corporate---translation,,, very, very expensive. I have been visiting for the last 10 years and I can not believe how much its changed. Vegas is becoming like NYC (and I can not stand NYC).
In my opinion in another 10 years the life blood of Vegas (gambling) will all but disappear.

Chump and BG

06-18-2007, 07:23 PM

I think this has been a VERY interesting thread. As a group, we mostly like things the way they were but there is dramatic difference in our mindset based upon what our previous comfort levels were and when we found Vegas. Did we like the Strip, the burbs or downtown and when did we find them? It is probably most likely the Strip as it has undergone the most dramatic changes of all regarding this topic. BG and I fell in love with the newly constructed, playfully themed, four star quality Strip of the 90’s. There were pirates, volcanoes, pyramids, castles and tigers. Cirque had just introduced Mystere with its incredible originality and fantasy. There was nothing sleazy or dark about this place, even in the casinos and we hopped into it with both feet. It was the love of our life after raising our family and spending years at Disneyworld with them! Our Vegas equation became (Comps-Gaming Losses = -0-). What a value! We visited Vegas five and six times a year and still could not get enough of it. Along the way, we had been reading Vegas internet comments. Sadly, we saw that there comes a time for most every Vegas lover to announce their withdraw from the Strip. Things change too much from what they had loved about it for them to feel comfortable there any longer. It has literally abandoned the Boomer Generation. Will the West side of the Strip ever hear live music again? RIP Fontana. We never would have guessed it would have happened so soon for us but we have to share, we are retreating from the Strip. We are bringing down our skull and cross bones and hoisting the white flag. The past few years have been very bitter for us as we have watched them tear out our favorite things in order to attract the younger demographic, conventioneers and the once in a blue moon, shopping tourists. We just won’t be comfortable with the coming Manhattan/Urban look on the Strip, and we simply don’t want to step up to a five star casinos play commitment irregardless. It has become far too expensive as a gambling joint. We still dream of Hawaii, Europe and the Caribbean. We have been away from them far too long on our gambling binge and we both want to see much more of each in our lifetimes. We feel no hostility. We will have no more cross words over their new direction, that’s all over for us. What remains is a great curiosity as to how things will unfold. Well, our best guess is that real gambling will remain downtown and in the burbs but mostly go regional. Airfare is going to hurt Vegas deeply as we slide further into a permanent energy crisis. Perhaps Vegas was very smart to focus on the California and SW kids for partying. Vegas will always be all of our kid though so I doubt that any of us abandon it entirely. Viva Las Vegas, or at least that place which we knew and loved, a place called Vegas. Perhaps its really more a state of mind and its time to pass the torch to another generation.

jwkick

06-18-2007, 07:56 PM

new: the new hotels are fun to look at, but not play in. I like the new fse better than the old days of dodging cars going from the fremont to nugget. old: I liked the feel vegas gave me when I first started going in the mid 80's it was everything I read about: the mint,dunes,sands,desert inn, and my farvorite the stardust. Plus since I was a poor twentysomething my 2.00 blackjack bets and crap bets seem to mean more to the casino's than my 25.00+ bets now:D

garyfranklen

06-18-2007, 08:16 PM

Steve---i Was Stationed Out Side Of Las Vegas In The Marine Corps From 1961---1965---the Old Vegas And Fremont Street And The Strip Were Romantic & Exciting----the Slot Machine Payed Off More Then--and Once In Awhile You Would See A Gangster Get Shot In Front Of Casinos----and All The Old Entertainers----i Still Go To Vegas Twice A Year---spring And Fall When The Temp Is Just Right For Me Around 80 Degrees--when I Go I Try To Stay At Defferent Places On The Strip---i Go To Lots Of Shows---this Fall I Will Try To Stay Ay The Vineshen---for Give The Spelling---thanks Steve---gary From Duluth,mn

CZee

06-18-2007, 08:51 PM

We date back to 1989. Remember the Maxim? Could walk to and from the Strip late at night...not sure that would be a good idea today.

What is it with the fascination with the Hollywood "beautiful people"...is there really a need for more dance clubs?

Just as in most of the business world today, the bottom line is profits. Since the corporations have entered the gambling business, the gambler has lost BIG TIME.

I guess the answer for us is not to return to Vegas.....but, that doesn't seem like something we would like to do. So, thank you Steve, for letting us let off a bit of steam!

pateboo

06-18-2007, 10:47 PM

I liked the old a lot more than most of the new. Where did someone find a $4.00 Coke. I saw Howie Mandel last week and my little glass of Sprite was $5.00. I went to the Paris hotel for a souffle. The single serving souffle cost $15.00 and the drink was $11.50. All I had to drink was one Kahlua and orange juice. It wasn't like Dom Perignon. People complain about the price of a gallon of gas these days. At least THERE you get a GALLON. For the price of these drinks you're only getting a few measly ounces. I miss the three reel slots. They're getting harder and harder to find. Some of the new slot games are really fun, it's just that the maximum bets are so expensive. There's a little TOO much change going on with the hotels and the restaurants. I liked that Vegas was very kitschy. Now they're all trying to be classy. Part of my tradition was to always go to Harrah's buffet and sit by the celery stalks and eat normal food at reasonable prices. Now I feel like I have to be dressed to the nines all the time to go eat and dishes don't have anything recognizable in them. I don't like that all the hotels are starting to feel the same, but I do like innovative things like the fountains and the volcano.

SandyA

06-19-2007, 07:26 AM

I've been going to Vegas for over 30 years and I'm ambivalent about then and now. I really miss walking out of McCarran and getting my rental at the airport, then driving down the Strip without sitting in a traffic jam. However, I do love the new hotel rooms at places like Caesars and Wynn and the theming of the various casinos. I agree with some of the comments about the change from themed to a universal contemporary look; I think that takes away from the fun of wandering from one casino to another to check it out. I am sad to see how terrible play tables have become...our local Indian casino offers better video poker than my beloved Caesars:( Currently, I make 4 trips a year to Vegas - I'm beginning to seriously consider cutting most of them out. Again, favorable gaming conditions for what I play are close to home, airfares are getting more expensive (and I don't see that changing), headliner shows are less expensive (most cases I get comped tickets) at our local casino, and I get comped rooms at "home". I've really been turned off by Harrah's takeover of Caesars; I've had a long history with Caesars and it's just so different then when I first started staying there in the 80s. That said, I still have a trip planned for July and I will probably be heading out there again in November.

Sandy

Boston_Bill

06-19-2007, 07:43 AM

Just one more thought. Look at the marketing of Las Vegas in something like VEGAS magazine. High gloss, ads for expensive condos and ultra lounges and expensive restaurants. Is there hope for a middle-aged low roller?

egglady

06-19-2007, 10:57 AM

My favorite time was the 90's. Every trip had a couple of new resorts to explore. Rooms and food were cheap. Gambling was good (remember 3/2 blackjack?).

I liked the competition, among hotels, for your hard earned dollar. The low to mid roller was king (or queen).

JMVegas5866

06-19-2007, 11:07 AM

Looking at some of the original Stardust buildings that were still in operation within the last 7 years, i have to say, they didn't spend your money on those places, concrete is cheap folks. Most of those places were not built much better than hotels/motels at the interstate off ramp.

Oh boy! Vegas history, my favorite subject, and I can't resist but to reply to this :)

The lowrise motels at the properties south enterance was part of the Royal Nevada which was built in 1954 and aquired by the Stardust in 59'. The 9 story tower and main casino floor were built in 1958. It's not that concrete is cheap, it is quite durable and strong, it's a commonly used building material to pour foundations. The difference over the years is the improvement in materials, construction methods, and technology. Advancment. Naturally, technology and construction methods were different in 1954 than in 2007. Places like Tropicana, Circus Circus, and Riviera aren't structurally bad or 'built cheap', as yesterdays gems can be todays gems just as CP (1966) and the Hilton (1969) are. The Four Queens (1966) and the Golden Nugget (1946) being the best example of them all. The original structures can be retro-fitted and reinforced if needed. For the most part old casinos were not built cheap. Research the works of the architects who have built them all and you see there were some very popular and creative ones whom have quite impressive resumes which include popular buildings in So CA and some located throughout the nation. Architecture, in itself both past and present, is actually a whole other history of Vegas, not just the legendary names of the casinos. They just didn't bring in anyone to construct the legendary places. You'd be very suprised, and when you look at every thing past the name it's even sadder to see those places are gone given its COMPLETE history. Many artists and architects from all over use to travel to Vegas to study the architecture back in the day as it was all very inspiring to them. At any rate, I'd say for any building that is neglected and is still standing tall and still is open and functioning after 50 years, that its been built pretty damn good. It's just like taking care of your own home, if you maintain it properly it lasts a long time, it will even outlast you. Keep in mind Las Vegas is only 102 years old. So for a city who's history is so young, these buildings even though they have only been around for 50 years, they are indeed very old when your talking about a town that is that young. Just remember once they are torn down you can't bring them back. Even though things are considered to be a National Landmark, that doesn't mean they are fully protected. I see alot of people on here who love old Vegas, well there's groups and preservation leagues out there that help and try to protect old Vegas. It's up to the people who are interested in old Vegas, otherwise if noone cares about it then you get the '2007 Strip' scene going up all over the place.

vegasmann

06-19-2007, 12:32 PM

maybe you should foward these reply to some in Vegas Commerce .

marmirdc

06-19-2007, 02:45 PM

The old...I miss the intimacy of the older casinos, the charm and character. These larger resorts are decorated nicely, but are just somewhat cold and have no real character. The themes, Dunes, Stardust, Sahara, Desert Inn, Aladdin, El Cortez, etc..they had charm, albeit old fashioned charm.
The strip just doesn't hold the allure it once had on me and so now we mainly stay off the strip at those places that still exude that old style charm.
I don't really look forward to Echelon Place or City Center, as they will just be too massive.
Hey Las Vegas, bring back the casinos for us little guys!!!
just my 2 cents worth!!

Sherry

06-19-2007, 07:24 PM

Hey VEGASMANN I definitely second the motion. Sherry/MI

Eileen

06-19-2007, 09:29 PM

Well, I've only been going to Las Vegas for 10 years, but I miss the old coin slots. I miss the old ferris wheel by the old Boardwalk that I thought had real people on it. I miss our old pit boss friends who are no longer around. I miss the old slot tournament at the IP. I miss the old racebook at Harrah's. I would have liked to have seen the original Alladdin. I miss the Double Dolphin slots at Harrah's and would love to see them come back.

But I love the watershow at the Bellagio. And I love the rooms at Wynn and at the Paris. And the gondolas at the Venetian are so cool. NYNY itself is cool. I guess I could do without the new stuff in favor of the old stuff.

Eileen

vegasgirl14

06-20-2007, 02:42 AM

I´ve been in Las Vegas since 1994 every year. I like the themed hotels. When I was in Vegas the first time, I was like in a fairy tale world. I feel like this evertime I go there. In the 90´s the hotels earn their money with gambling and that was the reason why the rooms, drinks, food etc. were very cheap. Nowadays it is hard to find a cheap hotel room, I´m afraid you have to go off Strip in the future. I like to go to clubs, but the prices for drinks are crazy.
I am always staying Downtown a few nights. It is another atmosphere than on the Strip. So I want to have both. I think there are too less lounges with great performers (non-celebrities) f.e. swing music or so, that must be great in the 60ies, I miss that. There are only the Ultra Longues which are very modern by now, but I think (and hope) this will change.

I am worried that the Strip´s look will change with the new hotels. There will only be buildings with glass and very modern. I think that will be very boring.
Maybe they only want to have rich clientele, which is very sad.

So with all this facts I prefer the older Vegas and I would love have been there in the 60ies or 70ies, but I was too young.

hockeymom26

06-20-2007, 09:15 AM

Our first trip was in 1992. Flew in during the day, there was nothing south of the airport. We stayed at the Hacienda. Loved that hotel. The newest hotel was the Excalibur. We had never seen anything like this place.
The Aladdin had 1.99 specials(steak and lobster), buffets were 3.99. LV blvd. was only 4 lanes across the entire street.
It wasn't too crowded and it was affordable.
Our favorite place is Sams Town,we seem to win more there and it is like the Old Vegas to us.

Sandyski

06-20-2007, 10:31 AM

The Old! LV is getting to feel more like NYC with so many tall buildings.

vegasmann

06-20-2007, 01:12 PM

Thanks Sherry

maybe someone with some clout will read this Message board

mrsfuzzo

06-20-2007, 05:58 PM

I definitely prefer the old although I do enjoy the free fountains and volcanoes. But you could see a show and stay in a hotel for a reasonable price. My first experience in 1969 was staying at the Flamingo for $25 a night and saw Paul Anka and was so close I could have hugged and kissed him if I wanted to. Can't do that today without paying a fortune!

RioGrande

06-20-2007, 07:06 PM

I think I have a somewhat unique point-of-view regarding this question. To begin with, I lived in Vegas in the mid 60s and there are some things I really miss. Does anyone remember Foxy's? My grandmother used to take me there for lunch. The marquee of The Mint? The Thunderbird? The old architecture was wonderful and I don't think that glass towers are anywhere near as interesting. But...

I don't gamble much. I'm such a low roller I barely roll at all. I am, however, a serious foodie. My husband and I spend at least a week in Vegas every year just to dine at all those over-priced restaurants headed by absent star chefs. We love the fact that Vegas has the heaviest concentration of fine dining in the country. So...as long as they keep opening fabulous restaurants I'll miss the old Vegas, but I'll love the new.

slugr

06-20-2007, 10:01 PM

Sherry

06-22-2007, 04:25 PM

babsie

06-25-2007, 08:18 AM

I have been going to LV since 2001 and all I can say is each year it gets more expensive. When I first started going to the casinos you would always hear someone screaming because they had won a jackpot. Now you seldom hear that sound because the slots don't pay like the use to. Also, the casinos are being taken over by 20 somethings who do nothing but sit at the slots and talk without playing. :mad: You use to get great food and hotel rates but now it's more economical for me to visit our local casinos for the same excitement.

LV you dropped the ball. Since gambling is becoming available in more and more states, there's no reason to travel to LV any more.

HeyJoe

06-25-2007, 08:32 AM

I have somewhat limited experience with the "old" Vegas, but I've been looking at plans for many of the new casinos and hotels coming in, for example the Echelon and the one which will replace the Frontier.

It seems to me that the future Las Vegas Strip is going to be boring, bland, and resemble a corporate office park more than a hodge podge of casinos each with its own character.

Condos and hotels that resemble condos and hotels anywhere else... where's the fun or uniqueness in that?

Boring. :confused:

RWHannu

06-26-2007, 12:54 PM

Reply to Irelandvegas I could almost guess which huge billboard blew down and it was at the ole' Vegas World, way down by Circus Circus. We stayed there during that terrible windy storm and I could see the sign swaying to and fro so I called maintenance, security, or someone and told them the sign looked as though it was about to go. I saw the man out on the roof but lost track after that since we had to leave. I did hear later the sign did go over. Sherry/Mich.

I thought it was the Hilton sign that blew down?

On the general "old vs new" issue, I'm hoping that none of you who are waxing nostalgic for the "old days" are the same people with endless complaints about smoking...it wasn't all that many years ago when you would have had your face laughed in if you had requested a "non-smoking" anything.

hipster818

07-03-2007, 01:59 PM

Though I would agree that old is better, I could not gamble unit 1999, I'm giving my age away, it is really a mixed bag for me. I have only been going to Vegas since 1987. Granted I could not gamble at the time, but there was a vibe of excitement and the place was not as crowded, and getting around was pretty easy. Finding people who were friendly was easy. I enjoyed going to the older places and seeing a bit of the past, both in age and glamour. There were a bunch of places to eat that did not cost an arm and leg to eat at. The entertainment for young adults and teens was not over the top and, so it was fun.

Once I was able to gamble I like to go back to the places that had a great vibe, but many of those places there gone or had lost there magic from what I remember before I was 21. At the same time though, there are things about the "new" Las Vegas that I like. The shows for one are more of a draw for my wife and I. The pools are nice and rooms have gotten better. Services as a whole have improved, a bit, in Las Vegas. Yet I think the biggest part for me is having so many choices as to where I want to play. But to gambling old Las Vegas will always be the better of the two choices.

That's my two cents.:)

VegasBride

09-06-2007, 07:15 AM

The first time I went to Vegas was in 1954. This was before Vegas Vic had a name and he could wave his arm back and forth. As a kid I was already fasinated and fell in love with the city. It took me until 1997 to get back there. All those years wasted.:mad: At that time, all there was was the Fremont Street area. I don't remember what hotels there were, I just remember the sign. But I guess I prefer Vegas in the late 90's. There were a lot more comps, food was cheaper and I loved the themed casinos. Each one was a new experience. There was one year that I went five times, but with higher airline prices, and tighter machines, I am down to once a year.

I hope that the powers that be has a chance to read all these comments regarding the changes in Vegas. It doesn't seem that anybody is in favor of what they are doing.:confused: After all, tourists are the ones keeping that city going.