Sunday, July 29, 2012

Maryland's Gambling Addiction

A study by the Pew Center on the States earlier this year showed that of 13 states that legalized casinos or lotteries in the past decade, two-thirds failed to meet projections -- including some that missed benchmarks by more than half.

And Massachusetts will do likewise! And then come the Casino Bailouts, Casino Bankruptcies, Taxpayer Subsidies - tax breaks and whatever it takes to pretend ..... revenues will fall from the heavens....

There are no consequences to the EXPERTS who get it wrong.

Local: Maryland

Casino push comes with budget risks

July 28, 2012

Photo - Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has called an Aug. 9 special session for the General Assembly, with hopes of boosting casino revenue. Thinkstock — *Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has called an Aug. 9 special session for the General Assembly, with hopes of boosting casino revenue. Thinkstock*

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley is banking that a Prince George's County casino and blackjack throughout the state will lead to massive gambling windfalls that will plug soaring budget gaps. But that's hardly a safe bet, according to analysts who reviewed similar gambling initiatives across the nation.

"There's no doubt Maryland will generate additional revenue in the short-term, but it's likely not sustainable over time," said Lucy Dadayan, a senior policy analyst at the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute who studies state gambling returns. "The pool of gamblers really doesn't expand. It just shifts."

Maryland gambling returns
Gambling source	Fiscal 2012	Fiscal 2011	Change
Traditional lottery	$1.795 billion ($556 million contributed to state)	$1.714 billion ($519 million contributed to state)	$.081 billion ($37 million contributed to state)
Hollywood Casino Perryville	$118.08 million	$82.6 million	$35.48 million
Casino at Ocean Downs	$47.95 million	$20.4 million	$27.55 million
Maryland Live Casino	$28.48 million	N/A	N/A
Total casino revenue	$194.5 million ($94.3 million contributed to state)	$103.05 million ($50 million contributed to state)	$91.45 million ($44.3 million contributed to state)

O'Malley has called an Aug. 9 special session for the General Assembly, with hopes of bringing the state's sixth casino to National Harbor and incorporating table games such as blackjack, roulette and poker at each of the gambling facilities. Supporters say the arrangement would spark a gambling renaissance across the Mid-Atlantic, filling a major void in the market for those who would rather not travel to marquee destinations like Las Vegas or Atlantic City, N.J., to place a wager.

The gambling boons projected in the infant stages of similar projects, however, have yet to materialize.

A study by the Pew Center on the States earlier this year showed that of 13 states that legalized casinos or lotteries in the past decade, two-thirds failed to meet projections -- including some that missed benchmarks by more than half.

Maryland officials point to the strong opening of the Maryland Live! Casino last month in Anne Arundel County -- though those profits came at the expense of already established casinos -- and the 15th consecutive year in which the state lottery increased ticket sales as proof that the state should parlay the ever-present appetite for gambling into tax dollars.

Gross revenues would total $1.6 billion if six Maryland casinos were fully operational with table games, according to a state-commissioned study, which found that Maryland could accommodate a new casino in Prince George's County without crippling business at neighboring establishments.

Such optimism, however, is clouded by the annual growth in the state budget, which puts even greater pressure on casino revenue to stem the tide of red ink that has spawned increased taxes and fees in recent years. Maryland is facing a more than $400 million shortfall next fiscal year, after raising income taxes to fill a $1.1 billion gap this year.

Tax rates are mostly higher in states that adopted gambling recently, analysts said, showing that casinos are relied on to raise revenue after other options have been exhausted.

In Atlantic City, the gambling mecca closest to Maryland, returns have dwindled as gamblers cross into Pennsylvania to play in new casinos. Detractors of a Prince George's casino
are concerned that a Washington-area site would merely take business from other Maryland venues.

Some critics, including O'Malley's chief Potomac rival, said the governor should focus on a litany of economic issues before turning to volatile projects to fill state coffers.

"It's kind of interesting when jobs and the economy and spending and debt are the big issues and the focus in Maryland has been on advocating for gay marriage and benefits for illegal immigrants and now it's expanding to gambling," Virginia Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell told The Washington Examiner. "Some people would call it a volunteer tax."

Maryland's tax collector, Democratic Comptroller Peter Franchot, shares a similar view, calling the expansion of the state's casino network "fool's gold."

As a change to the state constitution, Maryland voters would decide the fate of any gambling expansion -- along with November referendums on same-sex marriage and in-state tuition rates for illegal immigrants.

O'Malley, who originally expressed reservations about gambling growth in the Free State, said economic gains created by casinos are impossible to ignore.

"Progress is a choice; job creation is a choice," he said. "Maximizing the return on Maryland gaming for the benefit of Maryland families -- this, too, is a choice."

bhughes@washingtonexaminer.com

http://washingtonexaminer.com/casino-push-comes-with-budget-risks/article/2503385

State’s take may doom casino deal

By Mark Arsenault

| Globe Staff July 29, 2012

The state’s lucrative casino compact with the Mashpee Wampanoag, ratified last week by the Legislature, will now undergo a critical 45-day federal review amid signs that the state’s large take of tribal gambling profits could lead to the deal’s rejection, according to a Globe review of past compacts.

“I would say there’s a fair chance it would not be approved because the terms are way too onerous,” said Oklahoma lawyer Gary S. Pitchlynn, a specialist in tribal gambling law and a member of the Oklahoma Choctaw, speaking of the compact.

State governments cannot tax Indian casinos or impose fees on them, but tribes may trade revenue for something of “substantial value.” Normally, states offer tribes exclusivity to host gambling without commercial competition in return for a cut of the tribe’s revenue.

But the federal government will reject a compact if, in the judgment of the US Department of Interior, a tribe does not get “proportional” value for the money it agrees to pay.

In comparisons with other compacts, the Mashpee would pay a very high rate, and would not receive the benefit of an ironclad exclusivity guarantee. Experts also said a tight state-imposed deadline for completing the agreement could raise questions about whether the negotiations took place in good faith.

A rejection would not be fatal to the tribe’s plans, but it would add another layer of complexity to an already complicated process, and could cause a delay.

Under the terms of the deal, the Mashpee would pay the state 21.5 percent of all gambling revenue from their planned Taunton casino, in exchange for the exclusive right to run a gambling resort in Southeastern Massachusetts, and other considerations.

That is a steep percentage among recent tribal-state compacts, which by itself could raise a red flag with the Secretary of Interior as tantamount to a prohibited state tax, experts say.

“It is a high number,” said Matthew Fletcher, director of the Indigenous Law & Policy Center at Michigan State University College of Law. “At Interior, they’re going to look at it very closely.”

But the compact also requires the tribe to pay a lesser rate of 15 percent if the state infringed on the tribe’s exclusivity and permitted a commercial gambling resort in the southeast region — an “absurd” provision, according to Pitchlynn, who represents tribes and teaches tribal gambling law at the University of Oklahoma School of Law.

“I can’t for the life of me imagine why anyone would think 21 percent would be an appropriate number to pay in this day and age, particularly in that market with the competition that is squeezing them up there,” said Pitchlynn.

“Secondly, it’s absurd to think they would continue to pay 15 percent if the state created competition for them,” he said, since exclusivity is the primary price the state pays to justify getting revenue in the first place.

The Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians, agreed in 2007 to pay the state of Michigan 8 percent of its first $150 million and up to 12 percent on higher profits, in exchange for the exclusive right to run a casino in a zone covering nine counties.

The zone encompasses 8,000 square miles and about 1.9 million residents, a more substantial territory than the Mashpee’s semiexclusive zone, which cover about 1,800 square miles and about 1.3 million residents.

If Michigan permits commercial competition in the zone, the tribe’s state payment falls to zero, according to the compact.

“When the monopoly goes away, the legal and factual basis for revenue sharing goes away,” said Fletcher, from Michigan State.

The Mashpee’s compact further erodes the value of the tribe’s exclusivity by permitting a slot parlor with up to 1,250 machines to be licensed in the southeast with no effect on the tribe’s 21.5 percent contribution, another aspect of the deal Pitchlynn finds “surprising.”

“It may well be what we have here is the state overplaying its hand,” he said. “If you’re going to pay the state for something less than total exclusivity, it ought to be a fairly nominal sum.”

Negotiators for the Mashpee and for Governor Deval Patrick finalized the agreement July 11 under tremendous deadline pressure. Under the 2011 Massachusetts casino law, if the tribal compact was not finished and approved by the Legislature by the end of this month, the state gambling commission would be required to solicit bids for a commercial casino in the southeast.

The tribe, which could be years away from final federal approval of its gambling plans, was eager to reach a deal with Patrick to prevent a commercial competitor from getting a jump on the market.

The compact will keep a commercial resort casino out of the region at least in the near term, one of the deal’s benefits to the tribe.

But the fact that the Mashpee negotiated under severe deadline pressure may also play a role in the federal review.

“It was a fairly immediate, looming deadline and there was enormous pressure to get this done or the Mashpee would lose out,” said Steven Light, co-director of the Institute for the Study of Tribal Gaming Law and Policy at the University of North Dakota. The deadline could be “an important consideration,” among many others in the federal review, he said.

The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribal Council approved the compact 7 to 1, with one abstention, according to a tribal spokesperson. The member who opposed it, Carlton Hendricks, said he thought the payment was too high. “It’s a lucrative deal for the state,” he said. “It’s one of the most lucrative deals for any state.”

As casino gambling has expanded during the past two decades, tribes have generally negotiated more modest rates of revenue sharing, if they pay any at all, Pitchlynn said.

The Department of Interior in 2010 rejected a compact between the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake and the State of California.

That compact had proposed the tribe pay 15 percent plus some annual fees, in return for a package of concessions that included exclusivity for a 100-mile radius.

The department acknowledged the state had offered some valuable concessions, but concluded that the package was not worth 15 percent of the tribe’s gambling profits every day for the 20-year life of the compact.

The tribe negotiated a new compact with California, under which — at least initially — it shares no revenue with the state.

In the Mashpee agreement, in addition to a degree of exclusivity, the tribe also received a promise from the Patrick administration to hold separate negotiations to clarify aboriginal hunting and fishing rights and some land issues, as well as Patrick’s active support for the tribe’s efforts to persuade the federal government to accept the Taunton site for a casino. Getting the land accepted into federal trust on behalf of the tribe is a major obstacle between the Mashpee and their casino dreams.

“We think this compact is a fair agreement for the Commonwealth and the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe,” said Patrick spokesman Brendan Ryan, in a statement.

“In exchange for several significant concessions from the state, the tribe has agreed to a revenue allotment in order to mitigate the impacts of a resort casino.”

Mashpee Wampanoag Chairman Cedric Cromwell could not be reached for comment, though he has defended the 21.5 percent revenue payment as a trade for “meaningful concessions.”

Katherine Spilde, chairwoman of the Sycuan Institute on Tribal Gaming at San Diego State University, said the state and the Mashpee could make the case that the tribe received concessions that justify the payment.

“The state has agreed to be supportive of the tribe’s land-in-trust application,” she said. “That is something we don’t normally see in a compact, and something that is a substantial benefit.” Political support for the Mashpee, including the endorsement of the residents of Taunton in a nonbinding referendum, also speaks well for the deal, said Light.

Mark Arsenault can be reached at marsenault@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @bostonglobemark

http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/07/28/mashpee-wampanoag-tribal-compact-may-too-generous-state-risking-federal-rejection/e4aeZgSkOIuhM7MhcI5Z1L/story.html

Sell Your Kidney to Fund Gambling Addiction

This from Face Book --

Selling your kidneys to fund your gambling addiction

We've all been there. Priorities always go towards getting that gambling fix. Selling your kidneys to fund your gambling addiction joined Facebook.
Joined Facebook Saturday, July 21, 2012

GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GAMBLE

GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GAMBLE
Sunday July 29,2012

By Jimmy Young

OUR GOVERNMENT is indulging in some strange and rather worrying behaviour.
After confidently announcing its plans, it stumbles, skids, slides, stops, pauses and then continues as though nothing had happened, performing tyre-smoking U-turns.

As though that were not bad enough, I now think it may have flipped its lid and gone completely doolally. At a time when there is economic chaos, confusion and signs of panic in the Eurozone and our own economy is not in the most robust of health, the Government is urging us to gamble.

I have never been much of a gambler but I well remember the euphemism used to conceal the real nature of gambling. When I phoned to place a bet the voice at the other end of the telephone said: “Thank you sir, £10 invested.”

I thought to myself: “No it isn’t. Putting £10 into your building society or your bank account is investing; betting £10 on a horse is gambling.”

If gambling spirals out of control, as tragically in the case of some addicts it does, the results can be catastrophic.

In 1974 I presented a programme for BBC Radio2 about gambling.

I interviewed a compulsive gambler who hoped that by revealing his desperate plight he would help people to understand how dangerous gambling can be.

He told us that he had lost three businesses plus £60,000 in cash through his addiction to gambling and he simply was not able to give it up. I do not know how much his three businesses were worth, but his cash loss alone would be in the region of £440,000 today.

He provided a stark example of the tragically ruinous effect of compulsive gambling.

So I am therefore surprised and shocked that a Conservative-led group of MPs is demanding that betting shops should be allowed to install many more fixed odds gaming machines than the four per shop limit allowed at present. Why?

The reply from the Commons culture, media and sport select committee is that the “reluctantly permissive” gambling legislation over the past 50 years now looks outdated.

A source close to the committee actually described the most recent Gambling Act of 2005 as “puritanical”.

In case I sound like Cassandra, please believe me that I am nothing of the kind.

Clearly many highly responsible people get fun out of a modest fl utter on the horses, the dogs, or whatever tickles their fancy.

Yet we are repeatedly told we are living in austere times and paying off our national debt is a priority.

One EU country is virtually bankrupt and a couple more are not far from it, so it seems an extraordinarily bizarre time for our Government to be urging us to gamble with our heard-earned savings.

http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/335911/Jimmy-Young

Promoting Gambling with No Controls

Churches criticise recommendations of Select Committee report on gambling

By agency reporter

28 Jul 2012

Giving the go-ahead for more gaming machines on the high street threatens to trigger a surge in problem gambling, Church groups say as Parliament reveals its report into gambling.

The report recommends scrapping the upper limit of four high-risk B2 machines that betting shops are allowed to have on their premises. The report also expects local authorities to apply limits to the maximum number of machines in betting shops, but does not give power to local authorities to stop the spread of betting shops on the high street.

"This is a one way bet towards more addictive gambling machines in our communities," said Gareth Wallace from the Salvation Army. "Betting shops are making more and more profit from virtual games away from real horses.

"We're perplexed that the committee would recommend a further liberalisation of gambling machines when they heard evidence that problem gambling is on the rise."

The report, published by the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee and entitled The Gambling Act 2005: A bet worth taking?, looks into the gambling industry in the light of the 2005 Gambling Act. One of the stated aims of the Gambling Act is the "protection of children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling."

Church groups gave evidence to the committee last year and called for more to be done to protect those with gambling problems by effective regulation of the industry.

Daniel Webster of the Evangelical Alliance said: "The committee completely ignored the risks posed by B2 gaming machines. You can lose thousands of pounds an hour on these machines, but if the committee gets its way casinos will be granted more B2 machines, betting shops will be subject to no compulsory limit, and, for the first time, gaming arcades will be allowed to operate them.

"They didn't listen to the 22 per cent of callers to the gambling helpline citing these machines as problems, but backed an industry wanting to make a profit out of the pockets of the poorest."
James North of the Methodist Church said: "We believe the Select Committee has missed an important opportunity to halt the normalisation of hard gambling on our high streets. Category B2 gaming machines are strongly implicated in problem gambling. The Committee should have focused on reducing the availability of these dangerous machines."

Helena Chambers of Quaker Action on Alcohol and Drugs said: "The Select Committee has not given the increase in problem gambling the priority it deserves. Around 100,000 more individuals and their families have suffered from problem gambling since the Gambling Act of 2005. The committee recommends more local powers, but does not give local authorities the central power they need - to limit gambling outlets if they feel they already have too many."

The churches welcomed calls by the committee for further comparable research on problem gambling rates and the introduction of a national system of self-exclusion regulated by the Gambling Commission. However, their recommendations did not mention this proposal in relation to remote gambling.

Dr. Daniel Boucher, Director of Parliamentary Affairs for Christian Action Research and Education (CARE), said: "It is very welcome that the Committee recommended a national system for self exclusion which would be of great benefit for people dealing with an addiction, however it is odd and rather inconsistent that they do not mention this proposal in relation to remote gambling which is as important if not more so due to the easy access to numerous gambling websites."

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/16867

The gambler next door

News - Crime & Courts

Sunday, Jul. 29, 2012

INSIDE SPORTS GAMBLING

The gambler next door

By JOHN MONK - Jmonk@thestate.com

Across South Carolina, the kind of illegal sports bookmaking that accused Richland County killer Brett Parker is said to have conducted happens out of sight of the law and the public – and is far more pervasive than many people realize.

We’re not talking office pools, sports fantasy leagues, the friendly wager or the weekly poker game in the man cave.

Gambling through a bookie involves far more money. And bookies are far more organized and secretive, knowing that if they get caught, the penalty could be substantial.

Brett Davis Parker, who is charged with two counts of murder in the deaths of his wife, Tammy Parker, and a family friend Bryan Capnerhurst, in April, appeared for a bond hearing, Thursday at the Richland County Courthouse. Judge DeAndrea Gist Benjamin ordered he be remanded without bail.

- Kim Kim Foster-Tobin /kkfoster@thestate.com

“They fly underneath the radar,” said Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott. “They don’t have big flashing signs outside their business.”

Bookies are akin to other kinds of niche criminals – such as those who make moonshine or hold cockfights – who cater to a clientele whose members have no interest in publicizing the illegal bets, Lott and others say.

These days, various kinds of high-tech gambling are now widely available – using a computer to gamble at online casinos, for example. But old-fashioned bookies who take bets in person or on the phone on college and pro-ports games still ply their trade with a circle of confidential gamblers.

“Even in small towns, there’s usually someone who makes sports book,” said Frank Quinn, a Columbia area psychotherapist who’s spent more than 30 years treating various addictions, including gambling, in South Carolina.

No one knows how many sports bookies work these days across the state, but that’s typical, according to national experts.

“Illegal sports bookmaking continues to be a pretty big business. It’s hard to say how big, because they don’t report their numbers,” said David Schwartz, director of the University of Nevada-Las Vegas Center for Gaming Research, a nationally known site for gambling information.

People involved in sports gambling have incentives for keeping it quiet. Those include the fact that it’s illegal, of course. Also, gamblers fear being prosecuted for not reporting their winnings to the Internal Revenue Service and state tax authorities. Few gamblers do, law officers say.

And law officers rarely make an arrest. For one thing, it’s labor-intensive and time-consuming to penetrate and gather evidence against such a secretive operation.

“When you put this (sports bookies) up against murder, rape and those kinds of crimes, you really don’t have a lot of resources left over to devote to it,” said Robert Stewart, who headed the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) for 20 years.

But, Stewart said, sports bookie gambling “is imbedded in our culture.”

Current SLED Chief Mark Keel, asked last week how many bookies his statewide agency has arrested, couldn’t remember any arrests in his more than 30 years with the agency. Neither could two high-ranking SLED agents with him, who each had more than 30 years experience each.

“We couldn’t think of anybody,” Keel said.

At the state Attorney General’s office, veteran prosecutor Deputy Attorney General John McIntosh – whose experience as both a public defender and state and federal prosecutor goes back more than 40 years – could only remember one case.

That was a federal case brought by the IRS in Cayce back in the 1980s, McIntosh said.

Federal authorities in South Carolina have brought few if any bookmaking cases in the state in years.

U.S. Attorney Bill Nettles said, “This office allocates resources on the best assessment of the most efficient use of our resources.”

The largely invisible nature of South Carolina’s sports bookies illustrates just how rare it was for a prosecutor to allude to an alleged sports bookie gambling operation last week in a Richland County courtroom.

“Brett Parker was operating an illegal gambling business,” 5th Judicial Circuit prosecutor Luck Campbell said in court Thursday.

Although Campbell didn’t mention what kind of gambling, Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott on July 20 – when announcing Parker’s arrest for the shooting deaths of his wife, Tammy Jo Parker, and business associate, Bryan Capnerhurst, – specifically called Parker a “bookie.”

In May, before Brett Parker was arrested, Dave Fedor, one of attorneys, said Parker and Capnerhurst simply were meeting to settle a sports bet. Parker owed Capnerhurst money, Fedor said.

Lott also said the Secret Service in South Carolina is now actively investigating whether Parker’s alleged gambling operation, which the sheriff said centered on college and professional sports, ran afoul of federal law.

Mike Williams, Secret Service special agent in charge of South Carolina operations, declined to comment on any investigation.

But Williams did say, “We investigate any type of money transactions that are not in line with state or federal laws.”

Under federal law, authorities can only look into bookie gambling operations that involve “five or more persons who conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, or own all or part of such business.”
Persons familiar with sports bookies stressed their potential for harm.

“Sports betting is known as a gateway drug in getting young people hooked into gambling,” said John Kindt, a professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign campus and a nationally known gambling expert.

Young people often are highly focused on sports, Kindt noted. Betting for or against a team is a way to escalate the thrill of watching a game and seeing their favorite teams make points and exchange leads, he said.

Sports bettors can bet a game in various ways, including betting against a “point spread” or selecting the “over or under” of the total number of points to be scored in a game.

Bookies make their money off the “vigorish,” or fee, that a losing bettor must pay to the bookie in addition to paying the bookie the actual amount he wagered, Kindt said.

Bookies have to be careful not to take too many bets on one side of a sports event, because if they lose, they could wind up with big losses, Kindt said.

Thus, if bookies get an excessive number of bets on one side, they often reach out to other bookies to spread their bets around as a “hedge” against a big loss, Kindt said.

Quinn, who has counseled numerous South Carolina gambling addicts over the years, said sports bookies are particularly active during football and basketball season on college campuses, getting college students to place bets.

“You have college students laying down 50 to 100 dollars on a game, and if you have a couple thousand students doing that every weekend, that’s a lot of money,” Quinn said. Young people who avidly follow their favorite teams are particularly prone to laying down big bets, he said.

Quinn said today’s sports bookmaking has deep social and historical roots, recalling the state’s race tracks and open cockfighting rings where gambling has taken place. And plenty of S.C. youths fancy themselves as having inside knowledge of a sport.

Besides addiction to gambling, Quinn said, the ramifications can be serious.

“Several years ago, I had a young man who owed $17,000 to a bookie and wouldn’t pay,” Quinn said. “He opened the door one day, and someone shot him in the chest and he died.”

Quinn, an adjunct psychology professor at Columbia College, declined to identify the man because of patient confidentiality and because his family is still in the area.

There are good reasons why sports bettors continue to use local bookies, Schwartz said.

“It’s someone they know, and they know they are going to get paid. If you go with someone on the Internet who is headquartered in Antigua, you don’t know if they are going to pay.”

Dennis Bolt, a former 5th Circuit assistant prosecutor, said people who place bets with sports bookies don’t usually think they are committing a crime.

“It could be your neighbor,” said Bolt, a Columbia defense attorney. “As a matter of fact, it probably is your neighbor.”

http://www.thestate.com/2012/07/29/2372988/sports-gambling-hidden-but-widespread.html

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2012/07/29/2372988/sports-gambling-hidden-but-widespread.html#storylink=cpy

Crack Cocaine of Gambling

Crackpots

We sent school kids of 16 & 17 to 12 bookies to try to play 'gambling crack' fruit machines...seven of the betting shops let them in without IDs even though legal age is 18

Addictive ... gambling machine

Exclusive

By ROWENNA DAVIS

Published: July 29, 2012

SCHOOL kids as young as 16 are gambling illegally in high street bookies, a Sun investigation has revealed.
We sent a team of 16 and 17-year-olds to a dozen shops — and SIX allowed them to use highly addictive gambling machines.

Experts have called the fixed odds betting terminal machines (FOBTs) the “crack cocaine of gambling”. Bosses at branches of Ladbrokes, William Hill, Coral and Paddy Power did not even ask for ID when our youngsters entered their shops.

The law says bookies must demand proof of age and identification from anyone who looks under 18 — and remove those who can’t produce it. Best practice recommends checking anyone who looks under 21. But our teenagers were only asked for ID in six out of the 12 outlets in London.

Under-age ... Renie, 16

Renie Anjeh, 16, said: “I went into six shops in a day and I only had my age challenged twice. On one occasion someone asked for my ID so I just said I was 19. They didn’t stop me playing — they just said that I must bring my ID next time.”

FOBTs are mainly rapid high-stakes games such as blackjack and roulette, where you can gamble £100 a time and place a “repeat bet” in seconds.

It’s possible to lose a maximum of £18,000 an hour on them. Renie, from Lewisham, South East
London, said: “It is very easy to see how people get addicted to them. I played card-based games and roulette. None of them was skill-based. The thrill of trying to recover what you’ve lost is what keeps you coming back for more. You dig yourself into a deeper and deeper hole.

“It is very easy to see how people get addicted. At one stage I put £5 in and got 5p back but that was enough to make me carry on. Young people are not supposed to play on them but I think they really appeal to the younger generation.”

The FOBTs were introduced in 2002 and now number tens of thousands across the UK.

Bookies are only allowed four on their premises. But MPs on the Commons Culture Committee want to increase that to TWENTY and introduce the machines into arcades.

They hope this will stop the so-called “clustering” of gambling outlets on high streets.
Campaigners have slammed the plans as “illogical”.

Following our probe at the London betting shops, Ladbrokes said: “We will fully investigate the cases you raise using our CCTV and take appropriate action where our usual standards have not been upheld.”

Coral told us: “We are disappointed with the example highlighted here and will establish what went wrong to ensure the mistake is not repeated.”

William Hill said: “We are unable to comment on the specifics until we have had the opportunity to investigate thoroughly.’’

Paddy Power added: “We will fully investigate and take any remedial action that is necessary.”

Roulette addiction cost me £16,000

EX-gambler David blew £16,000 on roulette and other machines in bookies’ shops after getting hooked as a schoolboy.

The 22-year-old from Essex said: “I was 16 when I started. I was in school uniform when the bus dropped me down the road from Ladbrokes. I put a tenner in the machine and won.

“After that I went into a bookie’s shop every day for four years.

“It was mainly roulette — I liked the thrill.

Child’s play ... kid on machine

“The machines turn people into addicts because they’re so fast and the stakes are so high. It’s a means of escape. You get all the adrenaline of scoring the winner in a cup final.

“I later got a job at a call centre and blew it all in Ladbrokes. I’d put a grand in from my card.

“I lost about £16,000 in total, including my student loan. I got over it with expensive therapy.

“The only way to stop this is to crack down on the machines.”

By JAMES ORFORD, Psychology professor

BETTING firms are making huge profits out of these machines — and are getting the younger generation hooked on their most dangerous products.

Young people have a higher rate of problem gambling — and the unemployed are more likely to develop difficulties. Put these facts together and we could have a new rise of young problem gamblers.

These machines create addiction. The bright lights and flashing colours make them attractive to young people, who are more familiar with virtual games and computers.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4460620/Betting-shops-let-underage-punters-in-without-IDs.html

MGM mad about truth

Ad watch: Spot linking MGM, crime based on NJ report

Ad linking MGM, crime is based on NJ report

The Baltimore Sun

July 28, 2012

A television ad from a group opposing a casino at National Harbor went on the air this month with an inflammatory charge against MGM, the prospective operator of the proposed facility.

The ad, sponsored by the Prince George's Contractors and Business Association, links MGM with organized crime by pointing to the company's decision to leave the New Jersey market rather than cut its ties to a Chinese business woman whom that state's gaming commission deemed an unfit partner.

The ad says, in part:

What do we really know about a proposed casino at National Harbor?

There are more questions than answers.

Why did the company which would run the casino forfeit its New Jersey license rather than give up ties to organized crime?

In claiming that MGM had "ties to organized crime," the ad is citing a report by New Jersey casino authorities. It is true that MGM decided to sell its interest in an Atlantic City casino after New Jersey authorities decided its partnership in Macao with Chinese businesswoman Pansy Ho was "unsuitable" for an operator in that state. A state investigatory agency decided in 2009 that her finances were intertwined with those of her father, who has been alleged to have extensive connections with Asian organized crime.

The 74-page New Jersey investigative report is highly critical of the company's decision to pursue a partnership with Pansy Ho, saying MGM failed to adequately investigate her financial ties to her father in its "fervor" to enter the Macao market. It found that MGM's compliance efforts and due diligence in the case were "deficient."

According to MGM chief executive James J. Murren, the company made a business decision to divest its interest in the New Jersey casino and to continue its partnership with Pansy Ho in the more lucrative Macao market. He said MGM could have asked for a hearing in New Jersey but decided not to. Murren noted that the Nevada casino commission, looking at essentially the same facts, approved the partnership. According to media reports, three other states reached the same conclusion as Nevada. [That doesn't mean they were right.]

Murren said the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement made no finding that MGM itself had organized crime ties. The executive said he was "extremely upset with this body of lies" spread by the contractors' group.

"The question has to be asked who's funding this and what their motivation is," he said.

The Sun put those questions to Lisa Ellis, public relations director of the minority contractors association.

Ellis said the ad campaign was financed from the group's own resources and not contributions from rival gambling interests opposed to National Harbor. "We do not receive support and are not sponsored by any organization outside of ourselves," she said.

She said the association stands by the ad and pointed to the New Jersey report.

Nevertheless, Ellis said, MGM was not the group's real target. She said the association has a longstanding dispute with the Peterson Cos., developer of National Harbor and MGM's casino venture partner, over its minority contracting record. "This is not a personal grievance with MGM," she said. "This is a personal grievance with the legislative body sole-sourcing a project of this magnitude to the Peterson Cos."

According to House Speaker Michael E. Busch, the legislation the General Assembly intends to take up in a special session would not hand a casino license to National Harbor but would set up a process where it would have to compete with other sites in that part of Prince George's.

Ellis said that if that is in fact the case, the group may withdraw its opposition to the bill. "There's no opposition to a fair process," she said.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/blog/bs-md-ad-watch-mgm-20120728,0,89728.story

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Massachusetts: The Corrupt Hoax

The Genting/Mashpee Wampanoag/Taunton federal application was received by the BIA on June 4, 5 days before the referendum. Have you read it???

TO BE SUBMITTED

TO BE SUBMITTED

TO BESUBMITTED

For Immediate Release: Contact:

May 31, 2012 Brooke Scannell

617-922-0094 (Mobile)

brooke@thescannellgroup.com

Bureau of Indian Affairs Moves Forward with Mashpee Wampanoag

Tribe’s Application for Land in Trust

Notice is a major step forward in Tribe’s pursuit of an initial reservation

Mashpee, MA

- Chairman Cedric Cromwell of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe

announced today that the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is moving forward with its

review of the Tribe’s application for an initial reservation.

The BIA has issued a Notice to State and Local Governments regarding the Mashpee

Wampanoag Tribe’s pending application for an initial reservation in Mashpee and

Taunton, MA. The BIA notified the appropriate state and local governments pursuant to

25 CFR Part 151 of the pending land-into-trust application and informed them of a 30-

day opportunity to provide written comments on the acquisition’s impacts on regulatory

jurisdiction, real property taxes and special assessments (Section 151 Notice).

“This is a significant step by the BIA since it demonstrates a move forward in taking the

Tribe’s lands into federal trust, including for gaming purposes,” explained Chairman

Cromwell. “This initial reservation will allow our Tribe to fulfill our duty to provide

services to our nation, including housing, health care, education, job training, cultural

preservation and more in Mashpee. In addition, this is a significant step forward in our

plans to create jobs and revenue for our Tribe, the City of Taunton, and the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts through development of a destination resort casino in

Taunton. This is a monumental day for our Tribe, and is due to the hard work and

perseverance of Tribal leadership and Tribal citizens, especially our Elders, who have

never wavered from the goal of achieving the true sovereignty and economic selfsufficiency

that will come with this initial reservation.”

About the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe

The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, known as the People of the First Light, has inhabited

present-day Massachusetts for more than 12,000 years.

After an arduous 30+ year

process [and Jack Abramoff's help], the Mashpee Wampanoag were re-acknowledged as a federally recognized

tribe in 2007 and retain full tribal sovereignty rights.

##

http://mashpeewampanoagtribe.com/masphee/content/files/BIA%20Moves%20forward%20on%20land%20in%20trust%20application.pdf
For additional information --

WampaLeaks

Blindly Accepting Overstated Projections

...wildly optimistic or decidedly misleading ????

Or was it CORRUPT?

There are NO Consequences for irrational proclamations.

Shouldn't there be? They do it all over.

Suffolk Downs pretends to bring a gazillion low wage jobs to East Boston. They won't. What's the penalty?

Plainridge pretends Streets Pave With Gold. When it doesn't happen and local businesses close, what's the penalty?

The union membership has blindly lined up behind these Predators without considering the experiences of others.

The Genting/Mashpee Wampanoag Taunton Disaster promises likewise. What's the penalty?

We've been snookered by stupid politicians too dumb to conduct their due diligence, too willing to follow, who allow their over-inflated egos to be stroked by Gambling Lobbyists.

Who will tell the Emperor he is naked?

More gambling isn’t the answer for Maryland’s economy

By Heather R. Mizeur, Published: July 27The Washington Post

All that glitters is not gold.

Maryland’s political leaders are betting the farm on adding table games to our existing slots parlors and constructing a mega-casino in Prince George’s County. In doing so, they are asking Marylanders to double down on a flawed economic strategy that has already proved to be worth far less than advertised. Why the rush to make Maryland the next Atlantic City? Powerful gaming interests want you to believe that this is our only hope for new jobs in this difficult economy. We know better.

In 2007, Maryland voters were told that slot machines would generate an additional $660 million for education and would strengthen our economic outlook. We now know this was either wildly optimistic or decidedly misleading. We have seen less than 15 percent of our promised return. And that figure does not count the more than $120 million in taxpayer funds used to purchase the machines or the social expense of dealing with new crime and addiction and increased poverty.

Casino interests have promised up to 4,000 jobs with this expansion — an attractive number if these would be new jobs. But given that casinos typically attract 80 percent of their customers from within a 50-mile radius, a form of economic redistribution is more likely. Most of the jobs would slowly but surely be taken from existing local retail, dining and hospitality businesses.

A gaming expansion is a short-term fix that distracts us from the work of creating sustainable jobs and growing a diverse economy. Maryland’s ability to bring prosperity to all of our communities is limited only by our creativity, willingness to work harder and smarter, and ability to stay focused on the bigger picture.

Here are some ideas to start:

l Jobs of the future. Maryland’s potential rests on the expansion of its knowledge-based economy. We have already begun to build expertise in areas such as biotech and nanotechnology, cybersecurity, space exploration and clean energy, and we are at the head of the pack nationally in research and development investment. But we significantly lag our peers in turning these innovative ideas into marketable products. We have to improve on that with a long-term commitment to commercialization and loosening government regulations that are barriers to economic growth.

These jobs will also require a skilled workforce. By 2018, an estimated 66 percent of jobs in the state will require postsecondary education. As “Obamacare” takes full effect, we will need as many as 100,000 additional health professionals to serve the newly insured. We must join with employers to take a full inventory of our state’s economic opportunities and aggressively encourage partnerships among business, state and local governments and our robust university and community college system to better align student studies with job opportunities. We can make Maryland a leading state in matching our skills and talent with our economic needs.

l Small-business tax cuts. Small-business owners drive the engines of job creation. Freed-up capital in the hands of a small-business entrepreneur is often directly reinvested in the local economy through new hiring, supply purchases and marketing. We can provide tax relief to small businesses by closing the combined-reporting loophole that has allowed some giant corporations to avoid their Maryland tax obligations. Shockingly, between 2008 and 2010, at least 68 Fortune 500 companies across the nation — including Comcast, Verizon and Pepco in our area — paid no state income taxes in at least one of those years. Our economy works best when everyone plays by the same rules. We can boost the bottom line for small businesses while ending shell games for corporate titans.

l Rebuilding roads and rail. Rebuilding highways and bridges, investing in Maryland’s globally competitive Port of Baltimore and expanding public-transit options can create construction, maintenance and operations jobs and fuel economic activity. Maryland must give a boost to our dwindling state transportation trust fund. And no revenue option should be off the table to make this happen.

l Transformative school construction. Building new schools creates more jobs than almost any other activity in which government engages. Maryland has a backlog of roughly $5.5 billion worth of school construction projects. I have proposed a new kind of public-private partnership, tested in North Carolina and elsewhere, that uses creative financing options to fund sweeping transformations of our school systems. A partnership with private pension funds, which invest billions of dollars annually, can provide the seed money to get this program up and running. If organized labor gets involved, we could guarantee that these new jobs come with good union wages and benefits.

Seizing on these long-term opportunities would be like investing in Google as a start-up, while an expansion of gaming is akin to playing the penny slots and praying for a decent jackpot. That leaves us with a choice. We can hunt for fool’s gold or we can make real investments that will pay dividends for decades. Let’s play to win.

The writer, a Democrat, represents Montgomery County in the Maryland House of Delegates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/more-gambling-isnt-the-answer-for-marylands-economy/2012/07/27/gJQAY5xhEX_story.html

Massachusetts: Does anyone believe this is appropriate?

Governor Slot Barns using Massachusetts taxpayer $$$$ to hire a firm to lobby for Genting, a wildly profitable Malaysian investor????

The infrastructure for the Taunton site will cost buckets.

Governor Slot Barns will be long gone before those bills come due.

July 24, 2012

Holland & Knight to Lobby for Massachusetts in Support of Indian Casino

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has turned to Holland & Knight to help bring an Indian casino to his commonwealth, according to a lobbying registration report filed with Congress on Monday.

The governor hired the firm to secure U.S. Interior Department support for a resort casino that the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe plans to build in Taunton. The department must approve a land-in-trust application and a gaming compact between Massachusetts and the tribe in order for the casino to go up.

The Interior Department is reviewing the land-in-trust application. But the department hasn't received the compact, which needs the approval of the Massachusetts state Legislature before the agency can get it. The state House endorsed the agreement last week. The state Senate is scheduled to vote on it Tuesday.

The casino would bring in $511.8 million in revenue annually, the tribe wrote in an environmental report. Massachusetts would receive 21.5 percent of gaming revenues.

Holland & Knight partner Philip Baker-Shenk and associate Timothy Evans, who both are in the firm's Indian law practice group, are handling the account.

Jason Lefferts, a spokesman for the state's Office of Housing and Economic Development, said the firm was picked through a competitive bid process. Baker-Shenk didn't have an immediate comment.

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2012/07/holland-knight-to-lobby-for-massachusetts-in-support-of-indian-casino.html

Picknelly plans to divest from proposed Palmer casino

Peter Picknelly plans to divest from proposed Palmer casino to focus efforts on downtown Springfield casino

Published: Saturday, July 28, 2012

By Lori Stabile, The Republican

File photo | The RepublicanPeter Picknelly

PALMER — Peter A. Picknelly, chairman and chief executive officer of Peter Pan Bus Lines, said he is concentrating his efforts on a downtown Springfield casino and plans to divest himself from the proposed Palmer project off Thorndike Street.

“At some point I need to divest myself from the Palmer investment. The formality has not taken place yet. It needs to and I will likely do so sooner rather than later,” Picknelly said this week.

Picknelly said he has been an investor in the land, which is owned by Northeast Realty. He declined to detail specifics.

Connecticut-based Mohegan Sun has long wanted to build a resort casino off Thorndike Street (Route 32) across from the Massachusetts Turnpike exit. It is leasing the land from Northeast Realty, and is one of two announced casino projects for Western Massachusetts. The other proposal is by Las Vegas-based Ameristar Casinos, which purchased the former Westinghouse site off Page Boulevard earlier this year.

Picknelly, whose business is in downtown Springfield, said he now feels the city is the best location for a casino, and is proposing a casino on land in the north end of Springfield that would include the bus station property on Main Street.

Two companies associated with Picknelly last month presented an option to buy The Republican’s Main Street building and property, as well as the newspaper’s eight vacant acres on the Connecticut River, which is adjacent to property that Picknelly owns.

Picknelly’s involvement with the Palmer project was announced back in 2008. At the time, he said he felt Palmer was the best location for a casino. Picknelly said that he viewed the Palmer project as a real estate investment back then.

Now, he said, he sees a casino as part of a downtown revitalization plan for Springfield, as it would bring jobs and tax income. Picknelly said he believes having a casino in the city would provide the most benefits to Western Massachusetts.

“Times change. Circumstances change. I now wholeheartedly believe the best place for a casino in Western Massachusetts is in Springfield and in downtown Springfield and I will concentrate my efforts in making that a reality,” Picknelly said.

“I think the plans we’re formulating are exciting and I’m really looking forward to the revitalization ... I think it would be fantastic for Springfield,” he added. “It would have a dramatic impact on the city.”

He said he could not release details of the proposal for the north end yet, although he said several casino developers have been interviewed. He said he may have more information within the next 30 days.

“Plans are really developing now and at the appropriate time we’ll make the announcements,” Picknelly said.

Picknelly’s brother, hotel developer Paul C. Picknelly, also was attached to the Palmer project as an investor. In 2007, he said he was considering building a hotel on the property. Like his brother, Paul Picknelly at the time said he supported the Palmer site for a casino over an urban location.

Paul Picknelly recently has discussed opening a casino in the South End of the city with city councilors, although nothing has been formally released. But on Friday, City Council President James Ferrera III revealed that MGM Resorts International has options on properties from the area of State and Main streets to Union and Main streets. He said he was not given specifics regarding square footage or acreage of the project, but said he was told that MGM is working with hotel developer Paul Picknelly.

Paul Picknelly could not be reached for comment.

“We are not working together, but we certainly both believe that downtown Springfield is the best place for a casino,” Peter Picknelly said about his brother.

There also may be another casino proposal in the heart of downtown, according to Kevin E. Kennedy, chief development officer for Springfield.

Leon H. Dragone, manager of Northeast Realty, said the Picknelly brothers are investors in the Palmer project and have been committed supporters.

“It’s disappointing to learn they would support a competing project,” Dragone said.

In addition to Mohegan Sun and Ameristar, several other casino companies have expressed an interest in Western Massachusetts but have not released proposals. They include Penn National Gaming of Wyomissing, Pa.; Hard Rock Cafe of Florida, which dropped a casino plan for Holyoke; and MGM Resorts of Las Vegas, which canceled a plan for Brimfield.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/07/peter_picknelly_plans_to_dives.html#incart_river_default

No to more gambling giveaways

In My View: No to more gambling giveaways

By JOHN KINDT

GateHouse News Service

Posted Jul 28, 2012

Gov. Pat Quinn is expected to veto the 2012 gambling expansion bill, SB 1849, because of the refusal of the bill’s sponsors to prohibit political and campaign contributions from gambling interests. By vetoing this bill, which would create six new racetrack casinos (called “racinos”) plus five land-based casinos, Quinn will be confirming the tradition of “The Untouchables.” Today, Illinois needs “The New Untouchables” as historically embodied by such organizations as the Chicago Crime Commission established to combat Al Capone.

Pursuant to a 2012 study by the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois Springfield, thecity of Chicago is the most corrupt area in the U.S.

Gov. James Thompson’s administration authorized the legal granting of the 10 original casino licenses for $25,000 each to political insiders, although the total fair market value of the licenses was $5 billion ($9.5 billion in 2012 dollars). One license was granted to a political insider convicted in the Rod Blagojevich scandals. The 2012 gambling bill gives away another $3.5 billion to $5 billion, among other giveaways, by charging just $100,000 per casino license.

Since the original 10 casino licenses were granted, academics at UIS have spent two decades documenting millions of dollars in legalized political and campaign contributions made by lobbyists to legislative supporters of gambling.

Disturbed by the spreading political corruption accompanying legalized gambling, U.S. Sen. Paul Simon sponsored the bipartisan U.S. National Gambling Impact Study Commission. The panel’s final report called for a moratorium on the expansion of any type of gambling anywhere in the country, and the commission included recommendations for stringent curbs on campaign contributions, the recriminalization of slots/electronic gambling machines convenient to the public, and continued prohibitions on creating racetrack casinos. The Illinois 2012 gambling expansion bill obviously ignores all of these recommendations and adds to the national embarrassment of Illinois.

The state of Virginia rejected casinos during the same time frame that Illinois authorized its first 10 casinos. Virginia now has a surplus, while the Illinois budget is the nation’s worst.

If the Illinois legislature really needed money, it could immediately collect at least $5 billion in casino license fees that the casinos should have originally paid — instead of the mere $25,000 per license. In 2003 legislative presentations in Springfield by the Maryland Tax Education Foundation, for example, the fair market value of the Illinois casino licenses were pegged as being worth up to $500 million each.

Apparently, only troubled casino licenses have a fair market value under $500 million, as casino licenses are laundered by regulators from one casino owner to the next. In 2001, it was reported that Nevada’s Jack Binion, the tycoon of Horseshoe Gaming, was ruled unfit for his $25,000 Illinois casino license. Accordingly, Binion sold his Illinois casino interests for $465 million.

If Illinois needs tax revenues, the current casino license fees are a pot of gold worth billions of dollars. Until these billions are collected, authorizing racinos and new casino license giveaways to political insiders via SB 1849 is a non sequitur. By vetoing gambling expansion, Quinn will draw favorable national attention to Illinois as the home of “The New Untouchables.”

John Kindt is a contributing author and editor of the U.S. International Gaming Report.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x1489220153/In-My-View-No-to-more-gambling-giveaways

Why You Shouldn't Bet on Gam[bl]ing

Why You Shouldn't Bet on Gaming [unless, of course, you're like the fools in Massachusetts who fail to see this.]

Don't roll the dice with these companies.

By John Divine

updated 7/27/2012 5:25:25 AM ET

Casino companies Boyd Gaming, Penn National Gaming, and Las Vegas Sands all reported quarterly earnings this week, and they weren't pretty. In fact, you'd probably be better off hitting the roulette tables than letting your money ride on gaming stocks. Let's take a brief look at their results to understand why.

Oh, Boyd

Boyd closed down more than 17% for the day on Tuesday, and is down about 45% since its 2012 peak in February.

But why has the stock taken such a beating? Probably because Boyd missed both its EBITDA and EPS estimates. On top of that, Boyd has made a point to acquire abysmal locations in spots as varied as Mulvane, Kan., Amelia, La., and Dubuque, Iowa.

Boyd's only potential advantage over its competition is its miserable net margin of 0.2%. This is a potential catalyst because if Boyd is able to increase net margins by as little as 100 basis points, profits will multiply six times over.

The hope is that the recent Southern and Midwestern acquisitions will boost the company's presence in those regions, and higher margins will follow. It's likely that Boyd's astronomical P/E -- it trades for more than 90 times earnings -- takes this into consideration already and is counting on more impressive margins moving forward.

Penn National: nothing special

Penn National Gaming reported results that were a bit more tolerable, but still nothing that wowed investors.
That said, there were a few warning signs I noticed from the conference call:

Only half of Penn National's properties posted year-over-year EBITDA growth.

Not an insignificant portion of time was spent debating the futures of properties in Columbus vs. Toledo -- not exactly a sign of exciting growth prospects.

The company barely missed revenue estimates, reporting $712 million vs. an expected $722 million.

Management announced it was "pleasantly surprised ... with the good weather and the extra day in February." Any company surprised by the fruits of a leap year could be in trouble.

Maybe Las Vegas Sands will bring some good news?

Maybe not
Las Vegas Sands -- unlike Boyd and Penn National -- pays a dividend, and it's by far the largest and most successful company considered here. The current dividend yield is around 2.7%, and its market cap stands at about $30 billion. For some perspective, Penn National's has a market cap around $3 billion, while Boyd's is less than half a billion.

However, even Las Vegas Sands is not immune from sector-wide issues. Its profits fell dramatically from the same quarter last year, failing to meet analyst expectations.

The company announced net income of just $240.6 million, nearly 35% less than second-quarter earnings in 2011 -- in that time the stock has fallen just a bit more than 20% itself. To reverse this trend, Las Vegas Sands will have to count on Macau and Singapore as continued areas of growth. For an idea of how dominant these markets have become, consider the numbers: Macau and Singapore property EBITDA averaged almost $400 million in the second quarter, compared to the paltry $64 million EBITDA of Vegas properties.

Better luck next time
Unfortunately, these three earnings reports seem to be telling investors that the gaming industry is slowing. If these results serve as a snapshot for the health of casino companies, they may want to retake the picture.

The gambling sector is reliant upon emerging, rapidly expanding economies for much of its future growth. The Motley Fool's free report, 3 American Companies Set to Dominate the World, examines three companies strategically seizing unique opportunities in emerging markets in order to dominate them tomorrow. To learn more, read about it for free right here!

Meetings & Information

Sunday, July 29, 2012

Casino push comes with budget risks