By Jon Moser

General Manager, Las Vegas Tribune

10/23/01

Although I'm obviously biased, as General Manager of the Las Vegas Tribune, I found the recent revelations of our other writers regarding the claims of patrons (victims) against Mr. Rizzolo's Crazy Horse Too property to be most insightful. Considering the magnitude of these allegations, I have to say I was surprised that they were not brought forth also in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Perhaps they share the opinion of city councilman Michael McDonald. That of course being that Mr. Rizzolo is a "pillar in the community. Or possibly that Mr. Rizzolo is a regular "big advertiser" with the Review-Journal and they do not want to jeopardize that "positive financial relationship" with him.

Well, if their definition of a "pillar of society" includes the possibility of consistent unprovoked brutality by Mr. Rizzolo's squadron of steroid infested brain dead bouncers against patrons who might have had "one too many", then he is definitely "a pillar in the community".

We can even add another two bricks to his pillar by noting that one of his patrons that was unfortunate enough to encounter his group of "Bazoons" ended up paralyzed, allegedly by their doing. The other patron was not so lucky. He ended up dead. A high price to pay for a night on the town. (NOTE: Both of these legal issues are pending and will be judged in a court of law.)

Also up for consideration is that of a patron who spent 26 hours drinking in the Crazy Horse Too. He ended up passed out by his car in the parking lot until rescued by paramedics.

By anyone's standards, there is something wrong here. Regardless of the legal outcome, someone got paralyzed and another visitor killed in the parking area of Crazy Horse Too. At least one patron who would have to have been noticeably intoxicated was allowed to leave the premises and head for their own car. Apparently the term "socially responsible server" did not apply in this case.

Considering the length of time that the Crazy Horse Too has been in business, I cannot help but wonder if the aforementioned incidents were only the first to come to light.

It would be very interesting to search the records of the Clark County Court Clerk's Office to see if any other personal injury or physical abuse complaints were filed over the years against the Crazy Horse Too and how they were resolved. Considering that less than two percent of the legal cases ever filed make it to court, there is a real good chance that "previous discrepancies," if any, were settled out of court. Maybe that's a matter that the Las Vegas Tribune will be able to pursue in the future. The business with which Mr. Rizzolo chooses to align himself is sleazy at best, one which employees many women, to quote Benjamin Franklin, "of ill repute and low estate."

These women specialize in giving the lure of sexual favors while enticing the clientele out of as much money as possible for drinks, private dances etc. (Note: The majority of the economics regarding this benefit the "house," with a certain percentage kicked back to the "ladies" for their assistance.)

And then they just disappear about the time the patron expects their encounter with them to be fulfilled. What a perfect scam, in such a perfect place to conduct it.

Prey on unsuspecting tourists, charge exorbitant prices for drinks, give the illusion that the girls are available and if any patron questions the prices or what is going on, then just have the "house gorillas" throw them out. I highly doubt that the business which the Crazy Horse Too generates is built on the concept of "repeat and referral" clientele. Quite to the contrary, I would imagine that their intent is to just "process" as many one time patrons as possible. Judging by the longevity of this business, that concept has worked quite well.

Next to having a casino, a business like the Crazy Horse probably runs at some of the highest profit margins in this city. It is not this writer's intent to question the fact that Mr. Rizzolo is not entitled to derive "maximum benefit" from his business interests in the free enterprise system.

After all, no one is forcing the patrons to pay outrageous prices for beverages or private adult entertainment. It is their choice whether or not to patronize an establishment of this type and the expenses they may incur while doing so.

However, in the event they choose to do so, it should be the primary concern of the business owner to present themselves to their patrons in a professional, safe and socially responsible manner.

This includes but is not limited to making out of state visitors immediately aware upon entry of the fact that prostitution is not legal in Clark County and avoiding the illusion that it is, solely for the purpose of bilking uninformed patrons out of as much money as possible.

Basically, when you are there, you are welcome to look as much as you want, but legally you can't touch the 'merchandise'.

If they haven't modified their business practices to do so, it would also be a benefit to predominately post upon entry, in no uncertain terms, the costs for everything one might encounter when patronizing a business like Crazy Horse Too. Drink prices, table dances, private conversations, champagne, etc.

This would avoid patrons feeling that they have been "ripped off" after being presented with their bill at the end of the evening, thus avoiding unnecessary physical confrontations with the establishment's "security" people.

Considering the track record of Crazy Horse Too, a sign indicating that you are "entering this establishment at your own risk" would probably be appropriate as well.