Should Atlantic City put a cap on the number of casinos?
* New Jersey state report calls for review of Atlantic City casino regulations
ATLANTIC CITY — Now that the casino market has stabilized after a brutal 10-year stretch, which saw gaming revenues cut in half and five properties close their doors, some experts and officials believe now may be the time to review existing regulations to prevent another calamity. http://bit.ly/2UV1DnY
Quote: FatGeezusCasino gambling should not be restricted to Atlantic City. It should be allowed throughout the state of NJ.
I agree with you on that, but it seems that the voters (many of whom are presumably from in/around AC and benefit from those casinos not having any competition from elsewhere in the state) have disagreed as recently as 2016. At 77.24%-22.76% NO, the vote was not particularly close.
Quote: Mission146I agree with you on that, but it seems that the voters (many of whom are presumably from in/around AC and benefit from those casinos not having any competition from elsewhere in the state) have disagreed as recently as 2016. At 77.24%-22.76% NO, the vote was not particularly close.
The 2016 vote was held at the worst time.
I mean if 1/4 of the casinos had just filed for bankruptcy and shuttered in las vegas would anyone in Nevada be gung ho over expansion?
That was the situation in AC and NJ in 2016
Quote: darkozThe 2016 vote was held at the worst time.
I mean if 1/4 of the casinos had just filed for bankruptcy and shuttered in las vegas would anyone in Nevada be gung ho over expansion?
That was the situation in AC and NJ in 2016
I agree with that and wrote about the whole thing on a few occasions. Interestingly enough:
https://ballotpedia.org/New_Jersey_Allowance_for_Casinos_in_Two_Additional_Counties,_Public_Question_1_(2016)
A poll done early in 2016 had the vote split at 48% yes and 48% no. Of course, the polling sample only consisted of 806 people, so there was probably a ton of variance involved that may have, as much as anything, boiled down to where in NJ the people being asked lived.
Another interesting point of the, "Campaign," for lack of a better word, is that most of the money spent against the passage was by out of state gambling interests. Namely, Genting N.Y., Empire Resorts and Yonkers Raceway. Money spent against the proposition was significantly more than money spent in favor...so that's likely another reason (in addition to possible Variance) for the 48-48 split to turn into such a one-sided affair. Of course, seeing the Trump Taj Mahal close that year also probably gave some pause to those considering a, "Yes," vote.
It's hard to say what would happen if there is another vote on this in 2020, which I think is the earliest they could do it. You'll definitely see NY Gaming interests pouring in money in an effort to prevent it again, as they don't want any competition anywhere near NYC, particularly not in the Trenton area.
gambling is the 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 legal method of extracting money from patrons - more aggressive than alcohol sales
if the casinos fail for whatever reason - I have no sympathy at all for them - let the chips fall where they may - they should not in any way be protected from a free and open market
yes, I feel for the workers who might lose their jobs - but they chose this as their occupation
they're no more deserving than cab drivers who've been decimated by Uber and Lyft
no more deserving than Chrysler, GM and Ford workers decimated by foreign competition
if the car dealers got together and said there should be no more car dealers allowed in Philadelphia and its suburbs there would be hell to pay - no legislator who was not on the take would consider such a ridiculous proposal
Quote: lilredrooster𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝................. 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐢𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝
gambling is the 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 legal method of extracting money from patrons - more aggressive than alcohol sales
if the casinos fail for whatever reason - I have no sympathy at all for them - let the chips fall where they may - they should not in any way be protected from a free and open market
yes, I feel for the workers who might lose their jobs - but they chose this as their occupation
they're no more deserving than cab drivers who've been decimated by Uber and Lyft
no more deserving than Chrysler, GM and Ford workers decimated by foreign competition
if the car dealers got together and said there should be no more car dealers allowed in Philadelphia and its suburbs there would be hell to pay - no legislator who was not on the take would consider such a ridiculous proposal
If I remember Correctly it was a campaign of tv n radio ads exacerbating all the evils of gambling to nj voters trying to get them to vote no which it turned out was primarily financed by the NY casinos
The pie size is influenced by money and money flows unimpeded by geography.
As electronic and sports gaming must have ties to casinos, limiting casinos can be unpopular but it won't be unprofitable.
All ballot questions start with lawyers and lobbyists and press agents.
Quote: lilredrooster𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝................. 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐢𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝
gambling is the 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 legal method of extracting money from patrons - more aggressive than alcohol sales
if the casinos fail for whatever reason - I have no sympathy at all for them - let the chips fall where they may - they should not in any way be protected from a free and open market
yes, I feel for the workers who might lose their jobs - but they chose this as their occupation[\b]
they're no more deserving than cab drivers who've been decimated by Uber and Lyft
no more deserving than Chrysler, GM and Ford workers decimated by foreign competition
if the car dealers got together and said there should be no more car dealers allowed in Philadelphia and its suburbs there would be hell to pay - no legislator who was not on the take would consider such a ridiculous proposal
I personally feel resentful towards the bolded part of this comment because I know what it's like to work for a Company that was doing really well financially when I chose to work for them but recently got into big financial trouble, so bad that Financial Advisors specifically and publicly said that this Company's Stock has plummeted tremendously. Ouch.
So the workers who chose to work in certain Casinos would have assumed that a Casino would be a very good place financially to work for judging by how much money gamblers constantly put into them(One guy lost half a million in one day after winning it. Instead of leaving with the money he lost it in bad bets)
Another guy lost like $800,000 the same day(He had already been clearly drunk and the Casinos still served him alcohol, so naturally he was playing stupid bets(High bets that wouldn't make sense to someone who wasn't really drunk) and he sued after getting sober claiming he shouldn't have been given even more alcohol after being clearly drunk. The Casinos countered with basically,"We are not his parents and he is not our child nor is he a child. We shouldn't have to tell a grown adult to stop drinking and gambling." He lost his lawsuit, making him a loser twice )
Just these two guys lost 1.3 million together. If I worked at a Casino where just two people lost 1.3 million relatively in one day I'd think my job was really financially stable which is most likely the Casino Workers' thoughts before Casinos got into big financial trouble.
I am a habitual gambler who lives in northern NJ. I don't have any friends, relatives, nor acquaintances who live or work in Atlantic City or anywhere in southern NJ. I personally voted "no" on the 2016 Northern NJ casino expansion referendum. I will explain my reasons for voting no:
The casino market in various parts of the country is already quite saturated. Atlantic City itself suffered most from the introduction of full service casinos in PA and to some extent also lost patronage to "racino" slot parlours in places like Aquaduct and Yonkers racetracks in New York. The introduction of Northern NJ casinos wouldn't just hurt atlantic city casinos, it would hurt PA casinos and NY racinos. It would get to the point that most gamblers would just stick to their "local" casinos that is within a 30-40 minute drive from their house. Sure you can say its "competition" and "the free market should decide", but I think the number one factor for most gamblers all other things being relatively equal is travel convenience.
Hypothetically, lets say I enjoy playing blackjack with favorable rules, and the same house rules exist in PA casinos, AC casinos, and a new casino in the meadowlands. (3:2 BJ, dealer stands on soft 17, late surrender allowed). All three regional casino venues also offer complimentary drinks to all gamblers, etc. If these things are all basically equal, I am going to go with the casino closest to my home. Why should I drive 1.5-2 hours when I can drive 30 minutes to the Meadowlands?
1. I don't want to hurt Atlantic City. I like that town and want to see it prosper. I don't want to see more barely-surviving casinos with low turnout, decaying facilities, and modest patronage
2. I don't want to have a casino in Northern Jersey. Wherever Casinos pop up crime rates increase.
3. I don't want live dealer gambling to be TOO conveniently located. I want to have to make a deliberate decision to plan a trip down to Atlantic city instead of being able to pop into a meadow lands casino after work every day (I wouldn't even want to live in Vegas for that exact reason)
Quote: mainframeFatGeezus: Are you of the opinion there should be complete Adam Smith "lais·sez-faire" economic policies where the free market is allowed to do whatever it wants with minimal regulation or government interference? It sounds almost "libertarian" in philosophy, which is okay, I just want to know where you stand.
I am a habitual gambler who lives in northern NJ. I don't have any friends, relatives, nor acquaintances who live or work in Atlantic City or anywhere in southern NJ. I personally voted "no" on the 2016 Northern NJ casino expansion referendum. I will explain my reasons for voting no:
The casino market in various parts of the country is already quite saturated. Atlantic City itself suffered most from the introduction of full service casinos in PA and to some extent also lost patronage to "racino" slot parlours in places like Aquaduct and Yonkers racetracks in New York. The introduction of Northern NJ casinos wouldn't just hurt atlantic city casinos, it would hurt PA casinos and NY racinos. It would get to the point that most gamblers would just stick to their "local" casinos that is within a 30-40 minute drive from their house. Sure you can say its "competition" and "the free market should decide", but I think the number one factor for most gamblers all other things being relatively equal is travel convenience.
Hypothetically, lets say I enjoy playing blackjack with favorable rules, and the same house rules exist in PA casinos, AC casinos, and a new casino in the meadowlands. (3:2 BJ, dealer stands on soft 17, late surrender allowed). All three regional casino venues also offer complimentary drinks to all gamblers, etc. If these things are all basically equal, I am going to go with the casino closest to my home. Why should I drive 1.5-2 hours when I can drive 30 minutes to the Meadowlands?
1. I don't want to hurt Atlantic City. I like that town and want to see it prosper. I don't want to see more barely-surviving casinos with low turnout, decaying facilities, and modest patronage
2. I don't want to have a casino in Northern Jersey. Wherever Casinos pop up crime rates increase.
3. I don't want live dealer gambling to be TOO conveniently located. I want to have to make a deliberate decision to plan a trip down to Atlantic city instead of being able to pop into a meadow lands casino after work every day (I wouldn't even want to live in Vegas for that exact reason)
Blah, Blah, Blah
I am of the opinion that casino gambling should be allowed through out the state of New Jersey. Period. End of conversation!
It is already very hard to open a casino in AC, there are many regulations and building requirements. You cannot open a small casino, it needs to be a certain size and be attached to a large hotel. This alone will keep the number of casinos capped, as AC is not a big city (really it is not even a City).
Let operators open up any casino they see fit, competition is good for customers, and will force existing casinos to renovate and innovate.
There is no need for a fixed cap, when land and building use already take care of this.
If after all these years Atlantic City still cannot govern itself, that bodes majorly ill for its future:Quote: GandlerNo.
It is already very hard to open a casino in AC, there are many regulations and building requirements. You cannot open a small casino, it needs to be a certain size and be attached to a large hotel. This alone will keep the number of casinos capped, as AC is not a big city (really it is not even a City). Let operators open up any casino they see fit, competition is good for customers, and will force existing casinos to renovate and innovate.
There is no need for a fixed cap, when land and building use already take care of this.
Gov. Murphy says city still needs help, but state’s involvement has changed from ‘big-footing’
By Kate King
Sept. 20, 2018 5:34 pm ET
Atlantic City will likely remain under state control despite a campaign promise by New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy to end Trenton’s intervention in the financially troubled resort town. Mr. Murphy, a Democrat, said Atlantic City still needs assistance but that the nature of the state’s involvement has changed from “big-footing” to partnership under his administration.” --wsj
