Well folks, we’re in the casino business and “business’ is the key word. With that in mind here’s praying that the new digs that will probably be built at Suffolk Downs takes big money from non-Mass residents. Obviously it doesn’t work if we’re the only ones going. I think Moe summed it up best when he said to Schemp, “Hey, don’t eat the profits.”
The law calls for three casinos. One far out west, one in Bristol County and the Cape. Speaking of which, why don’t we just annex Bristol County to Rhode Island. Really. Anyone here have any use for New Bedford and Fall River and the people with the funny accents that live there? Let Rhodie deal with them.
Where was I? Oh, the other casino is Worcester east to Boston. That’s the one I want to talk about. The one we expect Joe O’Donnell and the racing guy from New York to have the dough and land to walk away with a license.
Think about it. This place could be a magnet for high rollers. Fly into Logan and take a private limo for a seven minute ride to players paradise. Don’t want to stay at the five star exclusive hotel within the complex then we have a Ritz, a Four Season, and other top shelf places within minutes.
And guess what? We are going to have big time hard to get entertainment coming to the Bob DeLeo Theater. Major stars. Can you say ‘championship boxing match’? And the celebrities. My goodness. The Inside Track hags must be having seizures just thinking about it.
And thoroughbred racing in Boston gets a big boost. Don’t forget, the real guy behind Suffolk is a successful race track owner/operator from New York. He’a all about racing. We could have a pretty good meet every year attracting top horses/trainers. That brings outside money. And I hope to see Joe O’Donnell’s rich friends start getting into the racing game at Suffolk. Come on boys. Form some syndicates.
Now ladies and gents, for this to happen there is one thing we must do. Stay away. What? You heard me. stay away? Not all the time, only when you want to spend some dough. Not big dough. But a night out. No penny slots and other games that attract us pathetics who dissuade others from going to casinos. Remember, we are all in this business together. You keep the crazy cousin in the kitchen. Not to be seen or heard by customers.
Sure we can go during most weekdays etc. But on weekends and most nights the average Joe should not be able to afford the place but for special occassions. Like Capital Grill. None of this affordable for everyman crap. Or do we want a sad and tacky joint like Rhode Island has with poor man’s Hooter Girl’s slinging beers and doing the TV commercial. Anyone see that?
And the shows. Small intimate theater so the ticket prices should be beyond reasonable. Use them as swag for some international whales and others who can pay. No Brianna’s from Saugus taking their boyfriend Joey to see Chris Rock for his birthday.
Of course the track won’t be like this. One of the last places in America where everyone is equal. Richest to the poorest to the whitest to the darkest. Nothing like it when it comes to atmosphere.
Hopefully the new slot parlor will be close to bean town and the oxygen tanks can be wheeled there and not Suffolk. Perhaps that is what Wonderland is for. Suffolk controls that land. Perhaps two bids by the O’Donnell group. Slots for Wonderland and Casino complex for Suffolk.
Who knows what they are thinking? And who knows how the recent gambling economy will affect the bids? All I know is that this better help the track. Why? Because I love the track and it’s all about me.
They might as well spend it here.
The people elect the legislators who elect the Speaker and the President, both of whom want it.
No one in power has hidden their support or oppostion to it.
Lots of groups, particularly unions, want it.
Many things in this state are justified on the basis that it creates jobs (Cape Wind, etc.) even if the economics are questionable.
So it therefore must be a good thing.
The estimates come from one person’s yearly study who’s been deeply connected to the industry for well over a decade (some would call it “shilling”). The “method” of his study is to go over to all the casinos and racinos in New England and NY and to count license plates, and divvy up all that money evenly, as if everyone spends their money the same. It does not seem like a very accurate way to do it to me… or a lot of other people out there.
There’s no attempts to try to predict behavior or where those people with those license plates are most likely to spend their money — ie SLOTS are where the $$ is made for casinos, and there’s a huge difference between visitors going there to see a show or spend a day at the spa (more likely for out-of-staters) versus someone who’s just there to park themselves in front of a couple slots (more likely for locals). Everything outside the casino floor is just meant to get people in the door — many, if not most of these things are money losers for casinos, from the big shows to the spas and $5 all-you-can-eat. They’re expensive advertisements to get people in the door, much like giving away a free toaster at a community bank if you open up an account.
Worse, though, is not how but when he counts those license plates. He does this over a long weekend during President’s Day weekend/February School Vacation… when most adults have a 3 or 4 day vacation and are much more likelyy to go out for an excursion over the long weekend… to a place like Foxwoods. There’s no fully bevy of normal weeknights, either, when it’s likely all locals and few out-of-staters — which would greatly skew the numbers, dontcha think? It would be like trying to figure out how much people spend from each state at Disney Land in Anaheim by only counting on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday on April School Vacation.
In other words, the $1 billion figure seems pure fantasy. Who knows what it really is, and who knows whether the money Massachusetts residents are spending are going toward the slots (big $$, huge RoI) or shows and dinner and all that stuff (the money losers for casinos, if those people don’t spend big on slots).
Is it at least conceivable to you that most of the locals spend most of their time at the casino in front of slots, whereas the young professional or parents taking a weekend off from their kids are going there for a big concert or a trip to the spa? And how that would mean the casinos aren’t actually making much money off the out-of-staters compared to the locals? That’s how it works, and that’s *exactly* why these people want to build in Massachusetts. If the shows and spas and $5 prime rib was so profitable to them, they wouldn’t want to build $500 million dollar facitilities if they were already ‘capturing’ the market. What they want are the new locals, the people who aren’t showing up at their casino 4-5 days a week simply because they live too far away.
But even if it were true, let’s say we’d capture a billion dollars from Connecticut. We can only 25% of that, tops. The costs of the casino bill to the state and society will be much higher than $250 million. 10% hit to state lottery, which earns over a $1 billion a year, is a $100 million in losses alone. Then factor in the hit to the local economy — including our sales tax base, real estate taxes and income taxes from local businesses and their employees — and we’re probably talking about another $100+ million (though I can give you no accurate figure there, because we’ve *never* funded a study to look at it…. EVER).
And we haven’t even factored in the costs of these things — and there will be costs. Half of the entire New Jersey Attorney General’s Office — at least a full 500 people — is devoted to their casinos (and that’s not the only group of employees the state has to oversee the industry), and this bill would create similar agencies in Massachusetts. Thought Mass Port was bad? We’ll easily be spending tens and tens of millions “regulating” this industry, perhaps upwards of a $100 million or more, and we’ll spend all that while doing a poor job of it. Promise.
Then there will be costs to local communities, both in terms of emergency services and schools, which could deal with more students from low-income families, and those aren’t the easiest students to teach. There are higher numbers of special needs and non-English speakers in these groups that will add great expense to local communities. We’ve already seen this in places like Conn.
Then there will be costs to families, which may not show up in any easy count, but will be there. If someone embezzles or $100,000 from their local union fund or from their town or business, the costs will be close to double that when you figure in accounting, insurance and legal fees. Sometimes it will be total losses, if there was no insurance. Police will be brought in (that will cost $$) and finally, these people will end up in prison (more legal $$ and $45k a year in prison expenses). Then, when these people are finally out, they’re going to be poor with absolutely no job prospects and who need benefits and a safety net. More $$.
Then there will be people who just decide to steal that money, instead of embezzling it the old-fashioned way. At least we can skip the tens of thousand of dollars being raided from the local charity or pension fund, but there’s still the legal fees and prison costs, and there’s still someone who’s essentially rendered unemployable afterward. These people need homes to live in and medical bills to be paid, regardless of their employment. That’s more $$ out of the system. All this adds up quickly and will mean tens of millions out the door every year — and a much worse quality of life for all of us, beyond the monetary costs.
Most states with slots have higher taxes than Massachusetts, and nearly all of them have had budget situations worse than Massachusetts (with deficits from 20-30% of their entire budgets, to upwards of 50% for some), including Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California, Michigan, Florida, Texas and the list goes on and on. Those are just the ones off the top of my head. If slots and casinos were such a boon, there wouldn’t be a race to the bottom.
If you give this any kind of consideration whatsoever, other than taking media reports of the “$1billion” study and being done with it, you’d quickly realize that not only doesn’t ‘have to be’ a good thing, but almost certainly isn’t. It says a lot about the people who are pushing this that they’ve never even been willing to fund a study that looks at the costs — they only look at revenue, and using flawed methodology at that, because they want to pull the wool over our heads. Are you going to let them?
In addition to dozens of elected officials it includes:
Greater Boston Labor Council
Greater Southeastern MA Labor Council
Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe
American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts
IBEW Local 103
IBEW Local 123
Massachusetts AFL-CIO
UFCW Local 1445
UFCW Local 328
UFCW Local 1459
New England Regional Council of Carpenters
Sheet Metal Workers LV # 17
Massachusetts Teachers Association Massachusetts Building Trades Council
Suffolk Downs
East Coast Electronics Co., Inc.
Carpenters Local 218
Carpenters Local 624
Carpenters Local 67
Carpenters Local 723
Carpenters Local 1305
Carpenters Local 2168
UAW Region 9A
Heat and Frost Insulators Union Local #6
Boston Carmen’s Union Local 589
Full list:
http://jobsandgrowthtoday.org/about/
They’re wrong on casinos. They feel so under threat by how small this country has made them that they’ll do anything to even have the chance of getting more union employees signed up, even something that will do long term harm to them and goes against the grain of the entire history of the labor movement.
Also, bear in mind your post is a complete straw man. I never said unions were hacks. I said the industry — referring to casinos — were hacks, funding hack studies and pouring millions of lobbyist dollars into this state to push through their agenda that will do incredible damage to this state.
But those estimates are being promulgated by all these folks. I assume they did their due diligence prior to touting this number.
So by your logic you are implying they are stupid and careless. I’ll take that into account next time they put out another number.
My original post points out that there is overwhelming support for this. In a democracy this is what you have to deal with, and it’s the way we make decisions.
Note that one group very opposed to casinos is MA CFL. How do you feel about that?
Promulgated means “promote,” or spread around. Came from means “point of origin.” The point of origin is Barrow’s studies. And Barrows is an slot industry-paid hack. That the unions have used his studies without analyzing the methodology makes them little different than the Governor or media, or anyone who’s had an agenda trying to get these things built without the public having all the facts.
If you declare that to be in favor of unions, one must be in favor of everything little, single thing unions want, then I have news for you: You won’t have very many friends of labor anymore. Personally, I know many people who work in labor and are firmly opposed to the casinos, so obviously I’m not the only ‘friend of labor’ who’s disagreed with the unions on this front.
The sort of zealotry you implied here — that everyone must get in line — is not what labor needs, not when their very right to bargain is under assault in almost every state of this country. I’ve spent a lot of time and energy defending unions in this state and outside, spending hours writing, talking and calling my legislators to protect collective bargaining in this state when it seemed like almost every democrat in the legislature was willing to leave it behind on the biggest and most important benefit for public workers, and am quite frankly offended by your attacks suggesting I’m anti-union. I don’t know whether I should say “how dare you?” or tell you to “grow up.”
You are on the opposite side of an issue with groups that you normally support and agree with, and in fact these groups are in strong support. Evne the teachers union supports gaming.
So either your very wrong or these people have some conspiracy-like reason to support casinos.
Personally I know that people want it, and the state and people will make money from it.
They want more people in the union. As I went into length discussion, their membership numbers have been in assault; I don’t blame them for being willing to get in bed with the villainy that is the slots industry. They’re backed into a corner and playing 10 runs from behind.
All that said, I think it will backfire immensely. Let’s talk about the teachers union. Guess how much the teachers union has already lost because of members that fell prey to the slots industry? $800,000 in embezzlement funds, then another $300,000 in legal fees and accounting costs just to figure out how much was embezzled!
Think it’s an isolated case? Well, it’s not. You can add hundreds of thousands of dollars embezzled from unions all around the region in numerous incidents. I’ve recorded many of them at my blog, under the “casino” tag.
The unions are wrong on this — desperate and willing to do anything — but wrong. This industry is using them to get their casinos passed, and when it does, they’ll be done with them, and unions will be paying the consequences.
—
Alright, time for me to ask a question. Regardless of what you think of this bill, how can you justify giving 9% of the revenue away to special interest horse folk? The racers and farmers, etc. If that industry can’t stand on its own two feet, particularly since both the horse tracks in this state are likely to win one of the licenses should we pass the bill, why on earth should we provide corporate welfare? Why not give that 9% to local communities, or as scholarships for state colleges, to keep our best and brightest in Massachusetts? If we want real job growth — that’s the way to do it.
In the meantime, the unions in this state should focus their efforts on more fruitful endeavors that will benefit everyone, like unionizing the Walmarts and Targets of this state. Now *that* would help the working people!
EB3…Suffolk Downs sounds like a plan…if we are going to have a casino (and we are) that is the place that makes most sense…for geography, access, workforce impact, etc… and the maine and NH folks that cut through MA to get to CT casinos will have a shorter drive.
Because casinos make money from creating problem gamblers among people who l live within 50 miles of it, and the closer they live, the more money casinos will shake out of their pockets. So, yes, Suffolk is the “best plan” … from the perspective of an industry lobbyist.
One man’s food…fun…
Never wanted it – just build one and see how it fares after a few years.
If you think that’s the target audience for a Caesar’s at Suffolk, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. High rollers rolling in, in limos from Logan? More like old geezers “rolling in” on their 1993 rusty Town Car, spending their social security checks on slots, sitting at the same 2-3 machines for 4=7 hours wearing a pair of dependables. More like the working poor or college students “rolling in” on the blue line, spending their student loans on poker instead of books, or the lonely and despaired unemployed spending their unemployment checks.
Ernie — if you want to rob these people blind and suck all the money out of the local economy, fine, but at least have the intelligence to look at what this industry is *really* like, and to know where they money is *really* going to come from. 90% of the profits come from 10-20% of the players, and they’re not the high rollers. That money is going to come from our families and it’s going to come out of our small businesses.
The good news is you aren’t the ultimate fool here. That’s Kim Driscoll, the Queen of Salem, who’s hard work revamping Salem and turning it into a small business paradise is going to go down in flames over her obsessive quest to help the powers that be push casinos — casinos that will (not may, *will*) drive dozens of businesses in Salem into the dustbin of history. Who’s going to go to the Willows, Downtown or Pickering Wharf, when they could have a cheaper night at Suffolk and get there on the T? If that’s the thinking of even 1 out of 20 people going to Salem these days, POOF that goes up in flame.
Well, it could be Bob Deleo, too, when, after a few years, all the millions that were spent by lobbyists finally come to light the DOJ’s phone starts ringing. Or maybe Patrick, who’s legacy as a savvy governor will be reduced to this (stupid) decision.
Ernie — you should have spent your time writing about how horses are going to get 9% of all the revenue from these things in special interest corporate welfare. 9%! As in, almost 1 out of every 10. To the special interests for horses! You know, instead of the local communities effected by the casinos, or schools, or money to offset the business lost to local communities from the giant sucking sound of these state-sponsored mega behemoth monopolies? Or as a fund mechanism for all the pension funds and local treasuries that will be looted and embezzled to fuel people’s addictions?
“casinos that will (not may, *will*) drive dozens of businesses in Salem into the dustbin of history. Who’s going to go to the Willows, Downtown or Pickering Wharf, when they could have a cheaper night at Suffolk and get there on the T?”…this was such a stretch of argument!!! Salem’s Mayor Driscoll , as anyone on the North Shore can attest, has done an amazing job and her city is thriving in spite of the recession…she makes a strong case for the casino bill based on data, not over the top fear-mongering.
The facts are the facts. Go anywhere where casinos came in, and you see within a decade or so all the small businesses go out. Atlantic City went from having over 220 restaurants, bars and pubs to having less than 60 today. Detroit lost more than 20% of their small businesses after casinos went in, and that was *before* the recession. I’ve long chronicled these things on my own blog and in diaries on this site.
When a casino goes up, there’s a radius around it in which they make their money from frequent visitors. Those visitors go there 3-5 times a week. They don’t spend money at the local pub or restaurant. If the casino goes up, those people aren’t going to go to the Willows to get a Chop Suey sandwich and some salt water kettle corn. They’re not going to go out to Pickering Wharf to get a coffee at Jaho’s. They’re not going to go get some Chicken Korma and Naan at A Passage to India. They’re just not.
Now, here’s the important thing: Most restaurants, bars and pubs have very little Return on Investment — after all their costs, there’s not much left over. 2-5% is successful! I’d imagine some of these businesses have probably been barely staying afloat in these tough times, despite how well Salem has done in spite of it. Say there’s enough people going to the casinos that Salem loses 1 in every 20 visits — and I’d say that’s conservative, given how cheap casinos can be on food and entertainment, and given the fact that they give out drinks… for free. If Salem loses 1 in 20 people, I promise you dozens of businesses will go poof in short order, and Salem will go back to looking like it was in the 1990s: a shell of what it is today.
Kim’s done a great job with Salem, but she’s not an expert on casinos. She hasn’t done anything to try to predict how much Salem will hurt if a big casino goes up at Suffolk Downs. Her very good friend was very involved in pushing for casinos here, and she joined in. I’m sure she geniunely believes that it will be a boost in tax dollars going to Salem, but in reality it will mean the state lottery loses 10% of a billion dollars — money that goes directly to cities and towns — whereas the casino money will go to the state coffers and I guarantee you cities and towns won’t get get anywhere near all of it. With what cities and towns lose from the state lottery, they’ll be lucky to break even if casinos go up — and those are the cities and towns that won’t be as heavily impacted as Salem would, if a casino goes up right next door at Suffolk.
Finally, remember this is a race to the bottom. We’re fighting harder and harder to get a smaller and smaller piece of the pie. Just look at this article from today in the Globe — the casinos in Connecticut and RI are barely staying afloat, and if we legalize casinos, it’s only going to ramp up the efforts by other states. It’s not entirely clear to me Massachusetts will even get 3 bidders on the 3 casino licenses at $85 million license cost and $500 million minimum construction cost. So, when the state fails to get that, what happens next? We nerf what we’re asking for, getting less and asking less in return. We will never get the tax dollars the Barrows reports have predicted — which is what the state uses for its numbers. As I’ve said, we’ll be lucky — when you look at the costs and the ‘benefits’ — for the state treasury to break even, when all is said and done, but nothing will account for the costs to families and small business, our friends and our neighbors, when it’s their business that goes under or their spouse that spends their kid’s college education fund on “Caesar’s on Suffolk.”
There is no stretching of my argument. This is what we’ve seen before and this is what we’ll see again, if we join the race to the bottom.
new and improved traffic flow as part of this plan, or will East Boston just have to put up with this like the do with the airport?