The Gambling Vultures follow a predictable pattern....they've done it elsewhere!
Early in the process of 'organizing,' the Massachusetts Gambling Commission conducted several Edumacational Forums....during one of the Forums, the Casino Experts discussed that Twin River had TABLE GAMES with which the Plainridge Slot Barn would be unable to compete .....
Predictable Solution?
ADD TABLE GAMES!
On the right side of this page is a lengthy list of categories, for example TABLE GAMES.
Massachusetts taxpayers; hard-earned dollars funded reports prepared by CASINO EXPERTS that included BOGUS PROJECTIONS - clearly overstated JOB CREATION and OVERSTATED REVENUE PROJECTIONS in order to SELL Predatory Gambling to politicians whose egos were stroked by Gambling Lobbyists and should have known better, Unions salivating for JOBS and a public all too willing to follow without question.
Blindly Accepting Overstated Projections
State should not cover Plainridge's bet
A gambler's assumption of risk should not be forgotten or forgiven as revenue from the Plainridge Park Casino fails to meet rosy projections. The slot ...
JOAN VENNOCHI
State should not cover Plainridge’s bet
DECEMBER 31, 2015
BY DEFINITION, GAMBLING is risky business.
And, according to the basic rule of play in any game of chance, the risk falls on the gambler — be it a senior citizen who loses his social security check to a slot machine, or one casino operator who loses customers to another casino operator.
A gambler’s assumption of risk should not be forgotten or forgiven as revenue from the Plainridge Park Casino fails to meet rosy projections. The slot parlor, located in Plainville, was expected to take in $262 million in its first year. However, that revenue projection has fallen to $160 million.
Plainridge was supposed to keep Massachusetts gamblers away from Twin River Casino in Lincoln, R.I., located just 11 miles away. It hasn’t. The Rhode Island venue offers a variety of table games and allows smoking. Constrained by Massachusetts law, Plainridge is a no-smoking facility, with no table games.
Penn National Gaming, the Plainridge casino operator, knew of those restrictions when it competed for the state’s only license for a slot-machine parlor. They assumed the risk that goes with it. A lesser haul than expected doesn’t change their obligations to the state.
Under the state’s 2011 gambling law, the casino owes Massachusetts 49 percent of its gross gaming revenue. If the casino makes less money than projected, so does the state. Based on current revenue projections, the state would receive about $78 million from Plainridge. Plainridge is also expected to pay about $1.5 million in local property taxes to Plainville.
No matter what the casino takes in, Penn National should not come looking for any tax reductions from the Commonwealth. But that’s what Penn National is doing in Bangor, Maine, where its slot parlor opened to much celebration – just like the one in Plainville. At first, revenue poured into Bangor’s Hollywood Casino — just like it did in Plainville. Then business fell off — just like it has in Plainville.
In Maine, when revenue dropped, Penn National lobbied for a tax break. When the local board of assessors voted against it, Penn National appealed. A saturated gambling market has led to similar requests for tax mercy from casino operators in other states.
Casino operators hand no money back to their losing patrons. Massachusetts should hold the operators to the same standard.
A gambler’s assumption of risk should not be forgotten or forgiven as revenue from the Plainridge Park Casino fails to meet rosy projections. The slot parlor, located in Plainville, was expected to take in $262 million in its first year. However, that revenue projection has fallento $160 million.
Plainridge was supposed to keep Massachusetts gamblers away from Twin River Casino in Lincoln, R.I., located just 11 miles away. It hasn’t. The Rhode Island venue offers a variety of table games and allows smoking. Constrained by Massachusetts law, Plainridge is a no-smoking facility, with no table games.
Penn National Gaming, the Plainridge casino operator, knew of those restrictions when it competed for the state’s only license for a slot-machine parlor. They assumed the risk that goes with it. A lesser haul than expected doesn’t change their obligations to the state.
Under the state’s 2011 gambling law, the casino owes Massachusetts 49 percent of its gross gaming revenue. If the casino makes less money than projected, so does the state. Based on current revenue projections, the state would receive about $78 million from Plainridge. Plainridge is also expected to pay about $1.5 million in local property taxes to Plainville.
No matter what the casino takes in, Penn National should not come looking for any tax reductions from the Commonwealth. But that’s what Penn National is doing in Bangor, Maine, where its slot parlor opened to much celebration – just like the one in Plainville. At first, revenue poured into Bangor’s Hollywood Casino — just like it did in Plainville. Then business fell off — just like it has in Plainville.
In Maine, when revenue dropped, Penn National lobbied for a tax break. When the local board of assessors voted against it, Penn National appealed.
A saturated gambling market has led to similar requests for tax mercy from casino operators in other states.
Casino operators hand no money back to their losing patrons. Massachusetts should hold the operators to the same standard.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment