Chipping machines - Make or cost money?

[Gamester]

Ok, they don't need days off but they also cannot take care of 4 tables and watch the games.

Has anyone any concrete evidence that AR tables equipped with chipping machines make more money than those without.

Ian

[Graeme]

I have worked in several large casino operations throughout Australia and South East Asia. All have them have tried to implement Chipping Machines and some have been very successful and saved a lot of money and others have diclared them a complete failure.

The difference has been the staff's attitude to change with the implementation of new technology. The reason they don't work is becuase the staff are against them.

Personally I am a ludite, I like seeing Chippers and I like Dealers who can shuffle a deck of cards. But I am also a realist. The casino of the future is the land of Chipping Machines, Quickdraws, Rapid Roulettes and Baccarito's. The casino player of the next generation will have grown up with Nintendo, Channel V and have a very short attention span.

Recently in a large casino operation with successful chipping machines we discussed whether it was really necesary to spend all that time training Dealers to chip anymore becasue they never ever have to do it in the workplace anymore.

Any casino implementing any new technology must put the greatest emphasis not on will the machine work but will the staff embrace it, change management is the key.

[stretch]

I work in a large south African casino. We have lots of 'cutting edge technolgy' alongside chipping machines. While the staff embrace all of the new stuff (to some of them its all they have known) our chipping machines are a waste of space. They spend more time off the tables awaiting maintenance or spare parts than they ever do performing their function.

With all that suppliers have been able to achieve as far as casino equipment is concerned, why has a decent reliable chipping machine not yey been invented.

[stretch]

.......and for the record, all dealers should be taught how to chip. It is fundamental to the profession.

[Newview]

Speaking as a casino operator (ie Head Office monkey) in the UK, I would think that the fact that my company alone spends over £500,00 per year on chipping machines would show that they are worthwhile - you don't tend to see casino companies throwing money away, do you ?

As for chipping being an essential skill, well it's not really, is it ? The main function it fulfills these days is simply letting the trainee get used to the feel of chips in a way that is easy to master and to give them some confidence. I think a lot of dealers still are proud of the fact that they can chip 4 stacks in - whatever, 15 seconds - and want to feel that has a value, when events have overtaken that skill.

There is a post elsewhere stating that casino bosses think all staff are dinosaurs and that in reality all managers are out of touch with the gaming floor - I think all parties would be better off if they understood that there is a bit of dinosaur in most staff, and a bit of out-if-touch ivory tower syndrome in most casino execs (ie people like me - I admit it) and try to work on it, not be too cynical.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts, I'd be interested to hear you guys' opinions on this stuff as, as you have pointed out, we don't get a chance to get input from the casino floor as much as we'd like.

[dangandalan]

It's nice to see that Head Office are interested in the opinions of the front-line workers.

Your comment on the amount spent on chipping machines begs the question: Did the executtive who decided to introduce them make a decision based on gaming experience, or a leafet from T.C.S.?

And while trainees' chipping skills may not seem so important when the club has plenty of machines to do the work for them, what happens when the machine breaks down? Give it a few years and no member of your staff would be able to pick up 4 stacks in 15 minutes, never mind 15 seconds.

And yes, I AM proud that I can still do it in 14 seconds while not having dealt for 4 years. Don't forget that todays trainee is tomorrows training officer. What skills can you expect them to pass on when they themselves weren't taught any in the first place?

[Craig]

Hi,

I fully agree with dangandalan, he has pointed out the exact same thing I have been saying since I came back to this country to work.

[ Don't forget that todays trainee is tomorrows training officer. What skills can you expect them to pass on when they themselves weren't taught any in the first place? [/b]

A point that companies and their head offices should be aware of.

Craig.

[stretch]

Here here! no matter what the technology there will be a time when for one reason or another it is not available for a period. This could be down to machine failure, or a staff member finding themselves in a new environment that does not support/ approve of/endorse that technology. What is that croupier supposed to do then? "Sorry, but I can't chip. Sorry I don't know how to shuffle cards" Heaven help that dealer, and shame on his/her training officer! Basic skills do not go into and out of fashion.

[Newview]

Thanks for the responses guys.

I suppose my reply would depend on how reliable you find the machines. We tend to have few problems with them, so there's not as much of a broken down machine issue.

Having said that, it is easy to lend too much value to being able to knock up 4 stacks in 14 seconds - if you have occasional breakdowns only, it's no drama to have to have someone chipping at virtually half that speed, as long as the problem is fixed fairly swiftly - we tend to be able to switch a machine from an emptier / empty table anyway.

I would still advocate a bit of chipping training anyway - like I said it's a good way to get trainees used to chips in a way that they can see their skills improving - I just don't think it's vital anymore.

I do believe that because nearly everyone on the gaming floor side of the industry was a trainee at some stage, a lot of people attach too much value to the way they were trained. Times do change, and some things have to be let go. Fundamentals are all very well, but when the time and cost of a training school is under scrutiny, there are more important things to look at (customer skills in my opinion).

Just as a postscript .... you won't find any company making a £500,000 decision (typo on original post) based on a leaflet .....

[ian]

Hello Newview,

Seems you are quite content with your machines. Have you done any costings to see exactly how much each machine saves you?.

Also do the tables with the chipping machines attain a higher drop and percentage hold than those without?

Ian

[Newview]

To be honest I don't think you need to go into too much detail.

If you go with the following assumptions (not entirely true, but close enough)

1) Chipping machines are the same speed as chippers
2) Breakdown time = member of staff sick time

Then you look at the relative costs - while I'm not prepared to divulge what we pay for machines, to have a permanent human chipper available would cost in the region of 9 times what the machine costs to cover all 112 hours per week - I don't think you really need to. I know there are other factors - chip damage, noise, chipping machines not used all week on quiet tables (while a chipper could be reassigned) etc - it's a bit of a no-brainer to me.

I know there are also arguments that a chipper can speed up the game where a machine can't - but to my mind not enough.

One other thing - I don't know what others think, but Drop and hold %-age are both, to my mind, massively overrated numbers in evaluating these kinds of things - win is the key number, in the long term. I bet that'll get a response !

One interesting thing I've heard is that Chipper Champ plus machines work faster on a left handed table than on a right handed one (or maybe vice versa) - anyone know if this is true ?

[thomas covenant]

Originally posted by Newview
One interesting thing I've heard is that Chipper Champ plus machines work faster on a left handed table than on a right handed one (or maybe vice versa) - anyone know if this is true ?

Now this is a bull, same machine is used on either tables, and there is no effect on speed. We are using quite a few of CC Pluses, so I am speaking from experience.
We have found significantly improved financial performance on tables with a chipper machine, to the point that we moved from a few machines, to using machines on all Roullete tables.
But we still train all dealers how to chip!

[PaulE]

I once (A Long Time ago, in a Galaxy far far away - Well Leicester in the mid 80's) raced a chipping machines with 2000 chips. We did this 5 times to prove a drunken point I was harping on about in the pub the night before.

I beat it hands down which I proudly (again drunkenly) told the owner a few nights later.

He then informed me that he didnt pay the chipping machine anywhere near what he paid me (however my paperboy got similar wages in those days if I remember) and the machines always did a double shift and wouldn't eat all the F****** salmon sarnies that were supposed to be for the punters.

I guess he had a point.

[Brian]

Elsewhere, time = money.

On roulette, # of spins = money (over the long haul) and time available determines # of spins.

In cameraland, it's often apparent that the average member of floor staff's ability to estimate the length of a given time period is extremely poor. (Invariably, the floor answer to a surveillance question involving the word "when" is "five or ten minutes ago". Invariably the reality is a lot longer than that.)

So, given that the human brain finds it almost impossible to sweat the money and judge time accurately simultaneously, time and motion studies would be required in order to calculate whether the chipper or machine returns a greater level of production (# of spins.)

As I remember it (we had gas machines back then that could only chip in black and white), the machine doesn't remove the stacks from itself, carefully arrange them in double rows, replace missorted chips in the stacks, bring five stacks from the back to quicken payouts, pick up fallen chips from the floor, chip up a quick short stack to pay 11 colour chips on RED that were the last gasp punt of a guy who is using all available colour on the numbers each spin, continue to chip, sort and stack through the tickley bit of the next hurried spin, etc.

Also, that idyllic scenario painted by the Head Office guy where a broken down machine is readily replaced by one from an empty game gives us an idea of just how much floor input he is receiving at decision time. As we all know, the only thing that has stopped British management from selling front row seats to "The Broken Machine: A comedy in one act", is the Gaming Act's entertainment clause.

All of the above costs time (# of spins) and, therefore, money.

(cont.)

[Brian]

(cont.)

Chipping apart, what else can't a machine do?

A machine can't catch a fainting dealer whose gills have suddenly become greener than the sides of his palms.

A machine can't icepick a lumpy's fingers off the rail and take over when things get Chinese.

A machine can't force a trio of Milanese milliners to become a quartet.

A machine can't keep an eye on more than one chip at a time and doesn't even know where the third dozen is.

A machine can't learn how to deal roulette properly while doing something useful in the meantime. (Or did NewView imagine that dealers were made in training school at a total cost of $305.67 each?)

A machine can't tell the pit boss what just happened and can't help to keep the dealer on the straight and narrow either.

From security, customer service, real time, training and efficiency points of view, give me a human being every time.

[Newview]

Brian,

Your reply, I think, illustrates my point that cynicism is too prevalent and that casino staff should give Head Office types some credit for knowing their job, just as much as Head Office should give credit to staff for knowing theirs.

I didn't need a lot of "input at decision time" because I've spent a number of years working on the casino floor, and I know how easy it is to replace a chipping machine (granted, a bit of a nightmare on a really big game, but not beyond the realms of possibility) , as well as the relative frequency these days of breakdowns (much less often than they seemed to be when you were referring to).

I fully understand the benefits of working as a chipper, I've done many hours of it myself including (in the very early trainee days) walking around chipping on games with machines, to learn how to deal much more effectively without having to spend 80% of the time with my head down.

There are indeed many other useful benefits from having a chipper, but none of them outweigh the fact that they are nine - ten times more expensive than a machine and that it is hard enough to get hold of staff at all, exacerbated if they are not going to be used to open tables.

I wish that in my company, as well as around the rest of the world, people would understand that there is more to a decision making process than an arbitrary call made by someone miles away in an office - casino staff no doubt understand that there are hundreds of elements and subtleties to their job that nobody else sees, why can you not understand that your senior management people's jobs are exactly the same ? The bottom line is that casino companies around the world would not spend literally millions on chipping machines if they did not do a useful job, whether it be to directly make more money with an improved spin rate, to save money on chippers, or to free up staff to make moeny elsewhere.

[Brian]

Newview,

I'd like to see even your company's figures on the "improved spin rate" that was achieved as a direct result of switching to chipping machines. I'm guessing world-wide stats are not yet available.

Funny surprise seeing the other 66.6% of your "useful job" descriptions involving cutting down on human resource expense. I suppose that's KIND of like improving win. What have you got planned for next year?

[Newview]

We dont bother measuring spin rates because we don't need to. While it is arguable whether they improve spin rates overall - doubtless the true answer is in some cases they do, in some cases they dont (also bearing in mind many games are held back by punters betting time, not dealt as fast as the dealer can get ready) I feel the other two factors are more important :

1) Machines cost 10% - 15% as much as chippers. We spend enough of our operating profit on staff as it is, surely (though I fully understnad it doesn't directly work this way) you'd prefer to have half a chance of getting some of the difference in improved pay for the rest of you

2) In the UK we find it very difficult to get staff - every chipper replaced is potentially a table opened. If a machine costs £6,000 per year, the table you open instead could easily win that in a week, in some casinos in an hour. It's not as if we have as many staff as we want to open all tables with chippers : given the choice between an extra table vs a possibly better dealt game and 50/50 improved spin rate (which costs me 9 to 10 times as much as the machine) you can see why I'd make the decision that most casino operators (the ones who can get adequate servicing deals) across the world have made.

Surely you would concede that chipping, for all the potential subtleties that occasionally help the game especially with a trainee dealing, is basically a semi-skilled job that would barely justify minimum wage and should be automated as a matter of course ?

[Brian]

NewView,

I'm glad that you have admitted to NOT measuring spin rates as that should also put an end to your using them as evidence that the machine is more (or even as) productive as the human chipper. Without those figures you're stuck with "cost savings" as your entire argument.

You say a machine costs 10-15% as much as chippers. Then you quote "£6,000 per year" as a rough guide to the cost of a chipping machine. Am I to assume (using only my poor grey substitute for a CPU) that chippers in Britain are now costing £40,000-£60,000 per year in pay and benefits? No wonder you want shot of them!

Also, when you say that you understand that increased profits are not ALWAYS given out to floor staff in pay rises, you show great wisdom and depth of knowledge of the casino business. However, you lose points again when you offer that: "every chipper replaced is potentially a table opened". There are a couple of flaws in this statement.

1. Four chipping machines would normally replace ONE chipper (perhaps 1 point something.)

2. If a chipper was freed to open a game by the introduction of a machine, you'd have to also replace one of the waitresses with a coffee machine in order to give him a break now and again.

Now on to, "the table you open instead could easily win that in a week, in some casinos in an hour" (£6,000).

I must apologise, I really didn't know about the woes of the poor little British casino industry. All that money out there waiting to be won and nobody to open tables. Maybe if they ACTUALLY gave pay rises, more night watchmen, etc. would be attracted to the business.

(cont)

[Brian]

(cont)

I'm sorry also that I won't be able to concede that chipping is a semi-skilled job because, in the first place, it's NOT a job; it's part of a job. Moreover, since the casino industry is a service industry (haven't you heard that we're all focusing on customer service now) it makes sense to provide as much "service" as possible. I don't know about you, but when I'm looking for entertainment, I like the service to come from humans.

[Craig]

Hi,

Brian brings up a very valid point, casinos are a service industry, don't you think that customers should come first? Because without them you will not have an industry!!

Originally posted by Brian

Moreover, since the casino industry is a service industry (haven't you heard that we're all focusing on customer service now) it makes sense to provide as much "service" as possible. I don't know about you, but when I'm looking for entertainment, I like the service to come from humans.

Personally I am for chipping machines, when they work! But where is the logic of having chippers on tables with chipping machines? It happens quite often in casinos in the UK!

Craig.

[Newview]

Cost of a chipper - say salary £13,000 - normally multiply by 1.11 to allow for other benefits = £14,300. That covers 40 hours per week, casino is open for 98 or more. 98 / 40 = 2.45, mulitplied by 14,300 = 35000. Add 10% for holidays, and you're in the right ballpark. Add to that the fact that I've overstated our cost of chipping machines (not prepared to make that info public) and 10-15% is about right.

As for customer service, I think it's very much stretching a point to suggest that anyone cares whether their chips are stacked by human or machine - I could argue with senior casino management all day about the risks of automated games and losing the dealer, but the chipper ? I don't think so.

Every chipper (person) replaced is indeed potentially a table opened - obviously this is not the same as every machine introduced being potentially a table opened, which you may have taken me to mean. I accept that I've gone a bit wrong then when I use the £6,000 as a number to compare against (sorry, should be more like 4 x £6000) but even so that's not a big number to try and win over a year. My personal feelings over pay rates are not important (not my area - can't change things !) but I think that there is a significant amount of business on which we lose out through not having enough staff.

You can argue all day about whether pay rises would get us enough staff to satisfy gaming demand to offset their cost - people do - but if the evidence showed it to be the case, then no doubt pay rates would be higher. Don't forget how far rates have moved on recently - I was on £6000 per year about seven years ago, even allowing for inflation things are dramatically better than that now.

Finally, I imagine you still see chippers on tables with a machine occasionally to either help out poor dealers, or to give trainees some action without their getting under rela pressure. I know it helped me out for a short stint every now and again in my first month.

[ian]

Hello Newview,

Thanks for your statistics - interesting reading.

The 10 to 15% seems to imply that the chipping machines are in service all the time and is compared against the cost of 1 staff member for 98 hours of casino operation.

But it does not factor in that many machines on afternoon shifts or Graveyard (where applicaple) may not even be plugged in - but the company are still paying for them.

Personally I think a small number of machines on the lowest stake tables that get constant action makes sense.

Casinos that have had chipping machines for years can become over reliant upon them and it is certainly an easier management decision to keep machines than to decide to operate without them.

[Newview]

I would very much agree with the last post.

As with all areas of any business, there is a balance to be drawn - you're probably right in that a lot of casinos will have become lazy over the years and may keep the odd chipper that is, if full efficiency studies were completed, not economic. Laziness will come into it as well, particularly in that from a shift manager's perspective, you'd always prefer machines that may break down (not so much these days) to staff that always bring problems of some sort (lateness, sickness, personal problems, discipline, rota requests etc.). Also you will have times when the cost of your human chipper is wasted, when you happen to have few customers and relatively many staff - the time will come when you can send them home to save wages, but it will never be easy to manage.

I'm not saying any of those negative staff things are guaranteed or should not be dealt with fairly and properly, just that with a free choice of an extra member of staff or a machine to cover it, a manager will prefer the easy option.

I think I mentioned earlier that I accepted that not all machines are used all the time (probably well below 50% in fact) but again, on balance, it's usually economic. Add in the fact that chipping machines will only get cheaper, and chippers more expensive, and you can see why there tend to be machines on most tables.

Every business decision is taken at the margins - nobody would argue (would they ?) that there are tables where a machine is a no brainer, just as there are clearly tables where there is not enough business to make a chipper worthwhile (eg only ever open on demand at £100 minimum), but decisions are made at the margin between the two extremes.

[Brian]

Newview,

Now I'm confused. You keep changing the input figures to the cost comparison equation. Since my area is surveillance, you'll pardon me if I keep plugging away in an attempt to get the facts.

You said:

"Cost of a chipper - say salary £13,000 - normally multiply by 1.11 to allow for other benefits = £14,300. That covers 40 hours per week, casino is open for 98 or more. 98 / 40 = 2.45, mulitplied by 14,300 = 35000. Add 10% for holidays, and you're in the right ballpark."

I prefer to discuss the reality of the situation.

So. Cost of a chipper - say salary £13,000 - normally multiply by 1.11 to allow for other benefits = £14,300. That covers 35 hours per week, casino is open for 98 or more. {little reality check coming up} Most dayshifts in British casinos (please correct me if it's me who is out of touch) see no "chippable" action until, say, 05:00 P.M. and then only occasionally. I'd like better to say that the average casino has no roulette action requiring even one chipper or machine until 06:00 P.M. That's 24 wasted (one) machine hours right there.

Next, I'm guessing that the average casino dayshift employs far more dealers than they can normally find work for. (They have to be there in case it gets busy but are usually on double breaks, etc.) Let's go wild and say that the average casino dayshift always has spare bodies on hand for chipping purposes. That brings the wasted (one) machine hour total up to (7 hours x 6 dayshifts) 42 hours. (Are you guys still shut Sunday afternoons?)

(cont)