AC: Revel Close...Sale...Fail
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-02/revel-seeks-penalties-on-acr-energy-as-it-plans-to-cut-power
Quote: VenthusSo it's Friday now, and my phone can't pull up anything new-- has anybody heard?
It's all a game of chicken now..HQ niteclub preserved their rights in court -fearing Straub could flip to Hard Rock(applied for AC licencese)....Straub could back out of entire deal Monday+ potential Revel implosion, since their power plant is about to file ch 11 next week
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/revel-casino-sale-jeopardy-u-005626877.html
"In a rare Sunday ruling, Judge Jerome Simandle ordered that claims from business tenants at the casino, as well as its sole supplier of utility services, must be heard before the sale can go through. The $95.4 million sale to Florida developer Glenn Straub is due to close on Monday, but the latest court order has cast that into doubt.
The judge scheduled a hearing for 3 p.m. Monday on emergency motions from businesses, including ACR Energy Partners and the popular HQ nightclub that had to shut down when Revel closed its doors Sept. 2.The outcome could well determine whether Revel is sold or whether Straub walks away from the deal, as he has threatened to do, if he is saddled with leases for businesses he does not want."
"But it also could scuttle the deal if Straub decides he no longer wants to wait. He has in the past threatened to scrap his purchase if the sale is delayed beyond Monday's scheduled closing date."
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2015/02/08/in-rare-sunday-ruling-judge-sets-showdown-over-future-atlantic-city-former/
http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/morning_roundup/2015/02/potential-buyer-willing-to-extend-revels-sale.html
Question is what/when will it re-open as and will it be able to turn a profit in the very competitive A.C. market.
Quote: ScanRevel is a beautiful property. Unfortunately it was mismanaged from the start. A great management team with an aggressive marketing campaign can turn it around.
I tend to think that, too.
While certainly not impressive, their revenue numbers were relatively consistent for a property whose primary goal seemed to be dissuading gamblers from visiting there. I would presume that the PC list is part of the sale, so if that's the case (maybe it's not) they will have a base to whom to market and already know who their good players were.
I think the key for them going forward is to try to be a good value for what you get. It's obviously not going to be the cheapest property in AC to stay & play, but it makes sense that it shouldn't be. If they do something with that indoor water park idea and try to figure out some other family-friendly type stuff, I think it could be a decent weekend destination place for people in the general region and people who visit AC, anyway.
I don't think that you get many people to go there who don't already visit AC, which is kind of what Revel seemed to be counting on initially. If management comes in and realizes that they have to operate in the confines of the market that already goes to AC, then they can be successful.
Furthermore, Revel was so saddled in debt that it never had a chance to begin with. They couldn't afford to make operating costs, and I don't know if casinos are any different from restaurants, in general, but I know that many restaurants don't necessarily make operating costs in the first year to three years, and Revel was not in a position to sustain losses just on operating costs.
The focus should simply be on providing the sort of amenities/experiences that can be had elsewhere, but to provide them at a lower price or to slightly lower-level gamblers. They still want their market position in AC to reflect the status and quality of the property compared to others in AC, while remembering that they are in AC. You can't create a market for a destination (generally speaking) where many people don't want to go, you can only try to appeal to a segment of the market that does/would go there.
Revel casino says will cancel deal to sell to Florida developer if doesn't close by midnight
http://www.newser.com/article/c3281b3cb83941bea4e9a76a4ee82f5f/revel-casino-says-will-cancel-deal-to-sell-to-florida-developer-if-doesnt-close-by-midnight.html
A deal to sell Revel Casino Hotel has gone nuclear, with an attorney for the would-be buyer threatening months of litigation if Revel makes good on a threat to push the deal through by day’s end.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/revel-deal-on-verge-of-collapse/article_ea673108-b09c-11e4-a679-b302940c7f22.html
will AC survive, let alone the Revel turn
around. Not possible.
Quote: AxelWolfGood management or not they probably still would of failed(AC is failing), it may have just taken longer with good management . If they give away to much they can't make money. There's only enough room for so many casinos and they were late to the party.
Generally speaking, I would agree with you, but their problem was that they couldn't get a market share that was compatible with their debt load. If you give that place a relatively clean slate it could be okay; they just have to focus on capturing some of the market that already exists.
Kind of like the town in which I partially grew up, you had two major grocery stores: Kroger and Giant Eagle. You also have Save-A-Lot, which is kind of a place for low-budget shoppers who either aren't on food stamps or don't get much in food stamps...or cheap b***ards like me, in general. In any event, Wal-Mart comes to town, this place isn't sustaining three Superstores. Save-A-Lot is fine (and still is) because Wal-Mart is a bit upper crust for their market.
The point is that you had Kroger, Wal-Mart and Giant Eagle and someone had to go, market couldn't sustain all three places. Giant Eagle fought the good fight for six months, tops, I think it was less than that. Wal-Mart was newer, cleaner, shinier and had more stuff...you can even get guns there (well, not handguns) which appeals to that market.
The point is that you don't necessarily need a strong market to come in and have a new and successful business, you just need a relatively stable market, or a baseline market that you know where the bottom point is and can survive that. You can't do that with a huge debt load, can't weather the storm, you have humongous debts and the others don't, so they can survive off of less than you.
I wouldn't be surprised if Wal-Mart had lost a little money during those first few months, but they knew they could weather that storm. They'd done their homework on the market before they even decided to enter it. Kroger was smacking and had always smacked Giant Eagle around in revenue, Kroger would survive and that location would continue to profit and Giant Eagle would give it up after awhile.
That's my point, working in the confines of the market that currently exists and what market will remain at the lowest point, (which the city hasn't hit yet) Revel can succeed within those confines with effective management, aggressive marketing, and a focus on value for the price. That doesn't mean you become a cheap low-roller joint (which means you won't see me at Revel because I'm a cheap low-roller) necessarily, it just means that you have to offer as good, better or new compared to what else is offered in the regions that will be your competition and do it at a better bargain. Further, they don't have to be strong, initially, just strong enough to weather the storm while other properties close and the market corrects itself.
Remember when you're camping with a friend and a bear approaches you; you don't have to be able to outrun the bear, you just have to be able to outrun your friend.
Quote: 7star4nowjust in: Revel deal on verge of collapse
Revel casino says will cancel deal to sell to Florida developer if doesn't close by midnight
http://www.newser.com/article/c3281b3cb83941bea4e9a76a4ee82f5f/revel-casino-says-will-cancel-deal-to-sell-to-florida-developer-if-doesnt-close-by-midnight.html
A deal to sell Revel Casino Hotel has gone nuclear, with an attorney for the would-be buyer threatening months of litigation if Revel makes good on a threat to push the deal through by day’s end.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/revel-deal-on-verge-of-collapse/article_ea673108-b09c-11e4-a679-b302940c7f22.html
My money is on you being correct about it ending up as scrap metal. It might be after a couple more owners but it is done and was years ago. Most just didn't have their eyes open to see it.
Marketing can only go so far.... they tried to change. They ran one of the best promotions ever. A Few APs and others complained but that was not a large percentage of the people. We were just highly tuned in to the situation because of our interests. That rebate went fine for many people. A few AP's got hosed (thats not going to affect them much) and someone tried to sue. At the same time they were matching other casinos offers daily. Very little play got you a fair amount of free play and rooms each month. 30 minutes on 9/6 $2 denominations got people offers for months. Perhaps their reputation wasn't great. I honestly think If Revel had been built in Vegas it would've been fine. Well perhaps not, I'm not sure how many casino's are doing fine in Las Vegas.Quote: Mission146Generally speaking, I would agree with you, but their problem was that they couldn't get a market share that was compatible with their debt load. If you give that place a relatively clean slate it could be okay; they just have to focus on capturing some of the market that already exists.
Kind of like the town in which I partially grew up, you had two major grocery stores: Kroger and Giant Eagle. You also have Save-A-Lot, which is kind of a place for low-budget shoppers who either aren't on food stamps or don't get much in food stamps...or cheap b***ards like me, in general. In any event, Wal-Mart comes to town, this place isn't sustaining three Superstores. Save-A-Lot is fine (and still is) because Wal-Mart is a bit upper crust for their market.
The point is that you had Kroger, Wal-Mart and Giant Eagle and someone had to go, market couldn't sustain all three places. Giant Eagle fought the good fight for six months, tops, I think it was less than that. Wal-Mart was newer, cleaner, shinier and had more stuff...you can even get guns there (well, not handguns) which appeals to that market.
The point is that you don't necessarily need a strong market to come in and have a new and successful business, you just need a relatively stable market, or a baseline market that you know where the bottom point is and can survive that. You can't do that with a huge debt load, can't weather the storm, you have humongous debts and the others don't, so they can survive off of less than you.
I wouldn't be surprised if Wal-Mart had lost a little money during those first few months, but they knew they could weather that storm. They'd done their homework on the market before they even decided to enter it. Kroger was smacking and had always smacked Giant Eagle around in revenue, Kroger would survive and that location would continue to profit and Giant Eagle would give it up after awhile.
That's my point, working in the confines of the market that currently exists and what market will remain at the lowest point, (which the city hasn't hit yet) Revel can succeed within those confines with effective management, aggressive marketing, and a focus on value for the price. That doesn't mean you become a cheap low-roller joint (which means you won't see me at Revel because I'm a cheap low-roller) necessarily, it just means that you have to offer as good, better or new compared to what else is offered in the regions that will be your competition and do it at a better bargain. Further, they don't have to be strong, initially, just strong enough to weather the storm while other properties close and the market corrects itself.
Remember when you're camping with a friend and a bear approaches you; you don't have to be able to outrun the bear, you just have to be able to outrun your friend.
Even with a clean slate what's the cost of maintaining that place? Again they cannot afford to give out as much as some other locations. People think the casinos Can just give out unlimited rooms food and free play.
If that was the case, someone would be doing it just to keep a steady flow of cusicustomers. I don't believe the casino's are all just super greedy and deside to give as little as possible.
I'm not convinced even if the rooms had the same occupancy as their competition it would help enough.
what marketing strategy would you use?
Quote: AxelWolfMarketing can only go so far.... they tried to change. They ran one of the best promotions ever. A Few APs and others complained but that was not a large percentage of the people. We were just highly tuned in to the situation because of our interests. That rebate went fine for many people. A few AP's got hosed (thats not going to affect them much) and someone tried to sue. At the same time they were matching other casinos offers daily. Very little play got you a fair amount of free play and rooms each month. 30 minutes on 9/6 $2 denominations got people offers for months. Perhaps their reputation wasn't great. I honestly think If Revel had been built in Vegas it would've been fine. Well perhaps not, I'm not sure how many casino's are doing fine in Las Vegas.Quote: Mission146Generally speaking, I would agree with you, but their problem was that they couldn't get a market share that was compatible with their debt load. If you give that place a relatively clean slate it could be okay; they just have to focus on capturing some of the market that already exists.
Kind of like the town in which I partially grew up, you had two major grocery stores: Kroger and Giant Eagle. You also have Save-A-Lot, which is kind of a place for low-budget shoppers who either aren't on food stamps or don't get much in food stamps...or cheap b***ards like me, in general. In any event, Wal-Mart comes to town, this place isn't sustaining three Superstores. Save-A-Lot is fine (and still is) because Wal-Mart is a bit upper crust for their market.
The point is that you had Kroger, Wal-Mart and Giant Eagle and someone had to go, market couldn't sustain all three places. Giant Eagle fought the good fight for six months, tops, I think it was less than that. Wal-Mart was newer, cleaner, shinier and had more stuff...you can even get guns there (well, not handguns) which appeals to that market.
The point is that you don't necessarily need a strong market to come in and have a new and successful business, you just need a relatively stable market, or a baseline market that you know where the bottom point is and can survive that. You can't do that with a huge debt load, can't weather the storm, you have humongous debts and the others don't, so they can survive off of less than you.
I wouldn't be surprised if Wal-Mart had lost a little money during those first few months, but they knew they could weather that storm. They'd done their homework on the market before they even decided to enter it. Kroger was smacking and had always smacked Giant Eagle around in revenue, Kroger would survive and that location would continue to profit and Giant Eagle would give it up after awhile.
That's my point, working in the confines of the market that currently exists and what market will remain at the lowest point, (which the city hasn't hit yet) Revel can succeed within those confines with effective management, aggressive marketing, and a focus on value for the price. That doesn't mean you become a cheap low-roller joint (which means you won't see me at Revel because I'm a cheap low-roller) necessarily, it just means that you have to offer as good, better or new compared to what else is offered in the regions that will be your competition and do it at a better bargain. Further, they don't have to be strong, initially, just strong enough to weather the storm while other properties close and the market corrects itself.
Remember when you're camping with a friend and a bear approaches you; you don't have to be able to outrun the bear, you just have to be able to outrun your friend.
Even with a clean slate what's the cost of maintaining that place? Again they cannot afford to give out as much as some other locations. People think the casinos Can just give out unlimited rooms food and free play.
If that was the case, someone would be doing it just to keep a steady flow of cusicustomers. I don't believe the casino's are all just super greedy and deside to give as little as possible.
I'm not convinced even if the rooms had the same occupancy as their competition it would help enough.
what marketing strategy would you use?
I think Axel is right on the money here. For all the issues Revel had at opening. Most of them had been addressed reasonably well by management toward the end. The comp system was very generous there, after being byzantine for a while. The resort was beautiful and they opened some low end places to eat. But the place is freakin huge. Their overhead has got to be 3 or 4 times that of the average in A.C. That combined with the declining gaming revenues in AC doomed them ....all their mistakes aside. They had no chance. The economics just don't work in AC for a resort that large. Yes, Borgata makes money but as nice as it is they have lower overhead than Revel. Borgata has essentially claimed the lions share of the AC market, especially with high end players. No reason for them to leave. Getting new customers just isn't that easy. There is just only so much gambling money to go around and AC is getting less and less of it. No amount of marketing is going to get people to spend money that doesn't exist.
Much as I wish the Revel would reopen and do well, my family loved staying there, it's hard to see it being a success given the current economic climate in AC.
I guess Revel figures it now has its hands on an additional $10 million lifeline, to keep the bldg alive, while it hopes for another buyer.
I wonder if Straub has a case against his own legal team, surprising since he has experience in this area.
I've bought some foreclosures & extreme due diligence is reqd. re liens,leases ,tenants, etc .
You buy a foreclosure, & any legal headache attached to it becomes your problem.
"It's official: Revel Casino Hotel has asked a federal judge to cancel a deal to sell the property to developer Glenn Straub's company and keep the company's $10 million deposit."
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/revel-officially-asks-to-cancel-proposed-sale/article_d03e6f1a-b143-11e4-bf01-3bd5fdd9ef53.html
In my experience, if the seller cancels, then they don't get to keep the deposit.
Quote: vendman1That 10 Million is more than they ever made running the Hotel/Casino...maybe this is their new business strategy. Did they keep a deposit from the other potential buyer too?
Actually, I forgot about that "In November, Brookfield Asset Management scrapped its purchase deal and forfeited an $11 million deposit."
So when you include Morgan Stanley , 3 cos. have forfeited a total of $ "1,521,000,000.00"? , for the privilege of NOT owning Revel.
It's the Money Pit that happens to have a casino.
Quote: AxelWolf
Even with a clean slate what's the cost of maintaining that place? Again they cannot afford to give out as much as some other locations. People think the casinos Can just give out unlimited rooms food and free play.
If that was the case, someone would be doing it just to keep a steady flow of cusicustomers. I don't believe the casino's are all just super greedy and deside to give as little as possible.
I'm not convinced even if the rooms had the same occupancy as their competition it would help enough.
what marketing strategy would you use?
You're probably right, I guess I'm just pulling for a new location to come and be successful just because of how much of a waste it would be for the place to go unused.
The main problem that Revel had, other than management, is that they simply didn't exist long enough to carve out their place in the market.
In terms of strategy, I'd probably start off with a Table Games loss rebate of $500, but I would make it so that it was for new Players Club Members who signed up on Monday-Thursday and the redemption would be EXACTLY half one week later and then the week after that. I imagine weekend business would be okay during the Summer, so if I opened in the Summer, I wouldn't need much help having good weekend numbers.
I'd obviously open a buffet because it's practically a matter of expectation for a casino to have one, and it's a relatively cheap way to comp people and make them happy. I'd probably give Pit Supervisors authority to comp buffets on the spot if a player sustains a quick and/or sizable loss without any penalty to rating or points.
Further, I'm also going to tier-match anyone on an equivalent tier if the show a valid card from another AC casino, regardless of which casino it is. That's a play I'd be stealing from Golden Nugget's playbook, as it seemed to work very well for them.
Monday, March 26, 2012
ATLANTIC CITY – The Casino Control Commission voted unanimously Monday
to license Revel Entertainment Group which expects to open its $2.4 billion casino
hotel next week.
“I am convinced that Revel has fully satisfied the criteria for the issuance of
a casino license,” Commission Chair Linda M. Kassekert said before the theemember
commission voted on the license.
In order to obtain a license, Revel had to prove its good character, honesty,
integrity, business ability, casino experience and financial stability, integrity and
responsibility.
The commission heard testimony from Kevin DeSanctis, Revel’s chairman
and CEO, Michael Garrity, its Chief Investment Officer. After DeSanctis
described the casino hotel for the commission, Kassekert said the property is “a
game changer.”
“With the attention to detail and understated elegance, it is easy to see why
many believe Revel is setting a new standard against which future properties will
be measured,” she added.“We are placing a great deal of confidence in you Mr. DeSanctis and your
team at Revel,” Kassekert said. “Your ability to market this property and draw
new people to come and experience what Atlantic City has to offer will play an
enormous role in the future success of the gaming industry here.”
The casino is set to open on April 2.
REVEL
RECEIVED AN ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT GROWTH GRANT FROM
THE NEW JERSEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WHICH
WILL PROVIDE IT AN ESTIMATED $261.3 MILLION OVER A 20-YEAR
PERIOD FROM REBATES OF CERTAIN INCREMENTAL TAXES. THESE
FUNDS ARE REQUIRED IN PART TO BE USED FOR SPECIFIED
PROJECTS INCLUDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GARDEN PIER AND
GARDNERS BASIN, BOARDWALK RECONSTRUCTION, OPEN SPACE,
DEMOLITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTIES AND SMALL BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT - PROJECTS WHICH WILL BENEFIT ALL OF ATLANTIC
CITY
http://nj.gov/casinos/news/2010/pdf/revel_license_2012.pdf
Quote: Mission146You're probably right, I guess I'm just pulling for a new location to come and be successful just because of how much of a waste it would be for the place to go unused.
The main problem that Revel had, other than management, is that they simply didn't exist long enough to carve out their place in the market.
In terms of strategy, I'd probably start off with a Table Games loss rebate of $500, but I would make it so that it was for new Players Club Members who signed up on Monday-Thursday and the redemption would be EXACTLY half one week later and then the week after that. I imagine weekend business would be okay during the Summer, so if I opened in the Summer, I wouldn't need much help having good weekend numbers.
I'd obviously open a buffet because it's practically a matter of expectation for a casino to have one, and it's a relatively cheap way to comp people and make them happy. I'd probably give Pit Supervisors authority to comp buffets on the spot if a player sustains a quick and/or sizable loss without any penalty to rating or points.
Further, I'm also going to tier-match anyone on an equivalent tier if the show a valid card from another AC casino, regardless of which casino it is. That's a play I'd be stealing from Golden Nugget's playbook, as it seemed to work very well for them.
FWIW, the Borgata did the tier match when they opened in July of 2002 (I think it was; might have been July 2003) which was how they stole me as a customer; I was Diamond and they gave me Black and comped my rooms walking in the door. Then they were so damned good at what they were doing they kept me.
Quote: beachbumbabsFWIW, the Borgata did the tier match when they opened in July of 2002 (I think it was; might have been July 2003) which was how they stole me as a customer; I was Diamond and they gave me Black and comped my rooms walking in the door. Then they were so damned good at what they were doing they kept me.
That's one of the keys right there Babs. You have to have your shit together and take care of your customers from Day 1. Revel screwed the pooch so bad at the beginning. They scared away a lot of their potential customers. You get one chance. Screw it up and most people will not come back.
"According to Stuart Moskovitz, attorney for Straub, "If we can buy this for $40 million instead of $95.4 million, why not?" Moskovitz had also stated that they were still willing to close on the property at $95.4 million provided that matters surrounding tenant rights are resolved.Tenants of the former property have successfully convinced the court to prevent a summary sale that would terminate their lease rights. Straub had sought to get the property free and clear, giving him the power to remove tenants at will. Over $16 million is tied up in tenant investments at Revel...Hard Rock International could be a potential player as their CEO recently was given preliminary approval to operate a casino in Atlantic City. However, the company was reportedly not interested in owning a casino outright.If a new sale is held, Hard Rock may not be able to pass up the bargain that could present itself. Straub had hinted that the property could go for as little as $30 million. If the price drops in that range, it may be too ripe a prospect to pass up for the Hard Rock.
So I ask why wouldn't Brookfield get back in also, throw some of the $50 mil or so in price reduction towards settling with power plant co?
http://www.pokerupdate.com/news/business-and-finance/02133-revel-sale-price-could-drop-to-45-million-or-less/
Worlds largest arcade ?Quote: FroggerAt this rate I'll able to buy it next year!
"I am Elmer J. Fudd, miwwonaire. I own a mansion and a yacht!"
Read more: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Revel-Claims-They-Have-Many-Buyers-For-Ex-Casino-292107861.html#ixzz3RxAitexN
Follow us: @nbcphiladelphia on Twitter | nbcphiladelphia on Facebook
What I've surmised, perhaps incorrectly, it that it is expensive to operate with its current square footage.
Quote: rxwineNot familiar with the Revel as a structure beyond outside appearance. Could it be reduced in height or other dimensions with a bit of fancy re-walling -- in other words become smaller, less expensive to maintain, without all-out demolition and total rebuilding?
What I've surmised, perhaps incorrectly, it that it is expensive to operate with its current square footage.
This guy (fishing for a contract?) thinks it could be fixed reasonably, architecturally:
http://articles.philly.com/2014-10-10/business/54832390_1_revel-casino-hotel-casino-operator-atlantic-city
The elephant in the room as far as "expensive to operate" is not, first & foremost , sq footage- but rather the poison pill deal the initial Revel CEO signed with ACR energy partners- which has helped sink 2 contracts of sale already.
It turns out the Revel was actually not primarily a resort - or a casino.
It was actually conceived, financially, as a power plant that "happens to have" a Resort hotel , & lastly... a casino. Before they plug in (1) slot machine the fixed electricity cost was $2 million a month.
"The company pays more than $2 million a month above its electric bills because it hired an outside firm to build it a separate power plant."
http://www.wsj.com/articles/revel-casino-still-shiny-and-new-teeters-on-the-edge-1405041999
Quote: rxwineNot familiar with the Revel as a structure beyond outside appearance. Could it be reduced in height or other dimensions with a bit of fancy re-walling -- in other words become smaller, less expensive to maintain, without all-out demolition and total rebuilding?
What I've surmised, perhaps incorrectly, it that it is expensive to operate with its current square footage.
I'm not a structural engineer. But I really doubt what you are suggesting would be feasible. It would probably cost more than the building is worth currently, to alter it in any major way. Maybe mothballing part of the building to reduce cost would be an option. They did that the first time around. A large percentage of the facility was never rented or used, or even finished. Including big pieces along the boardwalk both north and south of the main entrance(which was suppossed to be retail but was never finished). Also, about a third of the hotels rooms were never finished. At night you could see this obviously when walking north on the boardwalk toward Revel. The bottom third of the hotel tower would be lit, by people using the rooms. As would the top third. The middle third would be all dark. Early on in the buildings history the hotel was supposed to have 2 towers. Not just the one that was ultimately built. The base of the second tower is there. At the very north end of the property is a 6 pr 8 story chunk of building that serves no purpose. That was all that got built of the second tower. As far as I know nothing was ever done with that piece of the building. Which is pretty big all by itself. The thing is a huge white elephant. The excessive cost of power and is mainly due to the power plant contract which has killed two deals to buy the hotel out of bankruptcy already. The part that was finished was very nice. But I bet in total it was no more than 50% of the square footage available. Even that was never fully utilized either. The retail area that did open on the same level as the casino never had more than a few stores in it. Train wreck all the way around.
If the company strikes out a third time, it could be game over for the seaside casino, which has suffered along with the rest of Atlantic City as gamblers are drawn to venues in neighboring states. Revel representatives have said it could be forced to liquidate if it can’t attract a buyer within about four months.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-19/revel-again-allowed-to-scrap-bankruptcy-sale-seek-new-offers
The climate alone is a draw- all that sunshine in silicon valley-cant be good for their skin
Quote: MrsHeartRNI swear I'm not paranoid and I'm not that into conspiracy theories but I really think CET has a covert hand in this thing. I can't see how time and time again there are more and more stumbling blocks to this deal. (not that I don't think Straub is his own worst enemy and did nothing to elevate himself in this process) CET does NOT want another casino in AC potentially taking away their business. I can just see them being the big bully on the block.
interesting- that's as good an explanation as I've heard for Straub's actions- he certainly wasn't buying Revel to make a profitable operation via his wild ideas- considering the intermediaries CET set up to buy Showboat & AC Club- who knows?
Quote: MrsHeartRNI swear I'm not paranoid and I'm not that into conspiracy theories but I really think CET has a covert hand in this thing. I can't see how time and time again there are more and more stumbling blocks to this deal. (not that I don't think Straub is his own worst enemy and did nothing to elevate himself in this process) CET does NOT want another casino in AC potentially taking away their business. I can just see them being the big bully on the block.
Hmmm...I must admit this angle hadn't occurred to me. Lets examine. Now there is no question that CET does not want another open casino in AC. So check on that one. But an active conspiracy to keep the Revel closed. I don't see it. Now could they be working behind the scenes with a word to a regulator here, or a friendly call from one of their attorneys to a judge or something. Maybe. But actively trying to kill the deal...don't see how. That would mean they are in bed with either, the power company, the existing tenants of Revel, Straub (who I'm sure didn't lose his 10mil deposit for fun) or some other wild ass scheme. Number one they don't have the money. Number two they're not that smart. Interesting idea though. By the way Kennedy was killed by Oswald, who acted alone. :)
Now watch this thread derail.
I see visions of old Vegas.....someone in an office with a red phone direct to the "powers that be" , big pinkie ring, and Tony watching the door....lol
I do think they are on the pulse of this thing, it absolutely is in their best interest not to have another casino in AC.
They are probably in bed with somebody but it certainly isn't the gamblers and their loyal patrons!
Quote: MrsHeartRNNow could they be working behind the scenes with a word to a regulator here, or a friendly call from one of their attorneys to a judge or something..... Maybe. But actively trying to kill the deal...don't see how. That would mean they are in bed with either, the power company, the existing tenants of Revel, Straub
I see visions of old Vegas.....someone in an office with a red phone direct to the "powers that be" , big pinkie ring, and Tony watching the door....lol
I do think they are on the pulse of this thing, it absolutely is in their best interest not to have another casino in AC.
They are probably in bed with somebody but it certainly isn't the gamblers and their loyal patrons!
OK well that I can agree with whole heartedly. They are scum.
No comment on the Kennedy conspiracy? I was hoping for a monumental derail...I'm feeling naughty this morning.
