Theexpectedpayout, based on statistical models, is not infinite though, nor is it even very large, is my point. It's also possible that you could pull 777 on a slot machine an infinite number of times in a row, or guess that the ball will land on black an infinite number of times in a row. Does that mean the casino has to keep infinity dollars lying around? no. Because the payout isn't expected to be that huge. The coin-flipping game will end, and it will nearly always end in a reasonable amount of time for the casino to make money on it, even if they did price it at just $1 so that you're guaranteed to always win. Casinos give free shit away all the time.
What if they showed you ads before every coin flip? BAM they are making money while you are making money, win-win.
What if they had to flip everyone elses coins before they got back around to your second flip, taking over an hour to get to you because of the lines? Now they're giving out free shit, sure, but noone actually wants to dick around with it an "infinite" number of times.
My point is that there are, in fact, a myriad of reasons that a casino (or other entity in a different form) would run such a game, and still be highly profitable no matter what the entry fee was. The original question though, was how much would you consider it fair to pay yourself as an entrance fee to be on the player side. My answer is still $0, because even at $1 when I go to a casino I'm not going to stand there watching a croupier flip a damn coin all day just to make a buck here and there, since they certainly aren't going to manage the game in any reasonable amount of time to accommodate all of the people who would want to play.
They would need to provide me with some other incentive to play this game, or make it free so that *I* am getting some financial benefit from playing their game, not them.