MA Casino Developments

I think people are getting a little overexcited here about potential transit improvements- if the casino has T access, people will go to it by T. But if it doesn't, people will still go to it. A bus shuttle will almost certainly be sufficient for that... I could maybe see a ferryboat, but it would have to be a "glamour" type thing rather than solely for practicality.
 
fattony said:
However, if they build the casino near transit, then people will take transit to the casino.
Click to expand...

Where does this *if* come from?

Everett Casino is no nearer transit than Assembly Square was "near" Wellingon.
 
Wynn isn't going to do anything that the cities and the state don't force him to do as a condition of granting the license. This discussion is all about getting the cities and state to require transit connection as one of those conditions. That could be a bridge or a boat or a new commuter rail stop, but it has to be something.
 
underground said:
And that would preclude a T connection how?
Click to expand...
With an analysis of return on investment.
underground said:
Is the argument that IKEA didn't build at AS because it didn't need the T connection? I think it's safe to assume it didn't happen for the same reason a lot of big box stores don't open in places where land is expensive as hell.
Click to expand...
Yes! (And neither do Casinos, they depend more on the regulatory environment, than on location. So they do OK in the desert, in the forest, or on a riverboat). T connection = Land too valuable for TOD uses to waste on a big box store (or Casino) that can't use it to its fullest (which is residential/office @ rush hour).
underground said:
And if it had opened, I can't imagine they'd turn the T stop away.
Click to expand...
IKEA saw it coming and saw that they could make more money selling their lot (and asking people to drive to Stoughton instead) than they ever could actually building and operating their store
underground said:
I'd assume the same would be true of the Casino, and since Wynn is tied to his location and can't move to the burbs,
Click to expand...
Is somebody offering to build him a T-stop that I'm unaware of?
underground said:
if there was a way to get a T connection, he'd build it.
Click to expand...
OK, so now were imagining Wynn paying for it? In that case, his business case won't favor it, just like the LV monorail goes *around* his properties. The reality is that he and IKEA can count on patrons (in LV, or BOS, or anyplace there's an IKEA) having a car, hiring a limo/taxi/uber, or taking his shuttle, until some time in the fantasy future when his shuttles and comped limos get maxed out.
 
Last edited:
underground said:
Is anyone else following this counter-argument?
Click to expand...

Let's state "the question" and the possible answers.
The question (stated nicely by Ron Newman) is whether Wynn's Casino needs (or we are "owed") transit in order for his Casino to become reality

The T-as-Solution position is roughly: "Yes, we need or are owed transit"

The Roads are Sufficient position is roughly: "No. Wynn neither needs, nor owes us, nor is owed any significant rail-access infrastructure, station or ped bridge. Road modes will suffice."
(WHighlander, Choo, and Arlington)

underground said:
We're talking about a purely hypothetical T stop at an unapproved casino that's still in design stage. Wynn builds it, the state builds it, aliens build it, who cares. Sorry, but I can't follow what your counter argument is here.
Click to expand...

The Casino actually has a force (Wynn) with the plan and money to build in a very specific place. It is a real proposal in front of a state licensing board.

The competing site (at Suffolk Downs), by accident of history, has transit (underused, BTW, despite how we might rhapsodize about transit-accessible gambling).
 
Got it. Well, I guess we just disagree on it being a good return on investment. I'm guessing it's safe to assume neither of us is in the casino business, so who knows. We'll see.
 
novitiate said:
I think people are getting a little overexcited here about potential transit improvements- if the casino has T access, people will go to it by T. But if it doesn't, people will still go to it. A bus shuttle will almost certainly be sufficient for that... I could maybe see a ferryboat, but it would have to be a "glamour" type thing rather than solely for practicality.
Click to expand...

I could see Wynn or private operator running a ferry from Southie convention center to the casino when there are big conventions. Walk to legal harbor side or fan pier, hop on go across the harbor have a beer on board and jump off right at the Wynn. Big conventions would like that because be serious, if 15k are at mcca they are not going silver red to orange to walk from Wellington to get there. And Wynn and the state should be getting as much out of town money there as possible. It's like a 25% bonus on our tax revenue.
 
underground said:
Got it. Well, I guess we just disagree on it being a good return on investment. I'm guessing it's safe to assume neither of us is in the casino business, so who knows. We'll see.
Click to expand...

Yes, neither you nor I are in the Casino business. But Wynn is, for many years, with great success, without transit. Why doesn't his investment choice of a close-in-but-no-transit site carry the day on its face?

[Answer]: Some worry about Casino traffic, but these are mostly people who describe Rush Hour traffic and T-work-commutes, or missing their theater curtain, overture, tipoff, or other time-definite event.

Meanwhile, a Casino, while a traffic generator, generates it at off-peak times and for a use (gambling) that promotes losing track of time--and therefore is bascially car-accessible when it needs to be and imposes little congestion and system costs. You no more need to extract concessions from it than from the Bank of America Pavillion
 
Why doesn't his choice of a close-in-but-no-transit site carry the day on its face?
Click to expand...

Because the number of casinos he currently owns isn't enough data points to prove a trend, especially since none of those casinos is in Everett.
 
underground said:
Because the number of casinos he currently owns isn't enough data points to prove a trend, especially since none of those casinos is in Everett.
Click to expand...
Ok, so you're basically waiving away data about every Casino in America thriving on driving--and data that shows that the Casinos' one, privately-funded effort to "do" urban, fixed guideway transit (the LV Monorail) went bankrupt on them (producing a perfect -100% return on investment)

{ 2008 story on LV Mono underperforming ridership (21,000/day instead of 54,000)
2010 Bankrupty Equity wiped out (-100%), most bondholders wiped out (-100%), $650m system written down to $16m.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Vegas_Monorail}
 
Last edited:
No, I'm not doing that, but I'd love to see a link to that data if you could share it.

Edit because I saw you added a link: The LV monorail bombing doesn't show one way or another than every other casino is thriving due to driving. It also doesn't show one way or another that a transit connection in Everett wouldn't be beneficial. In actuality, it doesn't show anything other than the fact that it itself bombed. It's an n=1 experiment.
 
Last edited:
fattony said:
If the casino is built at Suffolk Downs, then people will take transit.
Click to expand...
Yes they will. But, even so, transit fans would be better off promoting 8,000 units of housing there (an Olympic Village worth) as its "next" use--real, core, daily ridership--than a Casino, the same way we're better off at AS with Assembly Row and Partner's Health offices than we would have been with IKEA.
 
Arlington said:
Yes they will. But, even so, transit fans would be better off promoting 8,000 units of housing there (an Olympic Village worth) as its "next" use--real, core, daily ridership--than a Casino, the same way we're better off at AS with Assembly Row and Partner's Health offices than we would have been with IKEA.
Click to expand...

That is a good point. Residential might be a better use for Suffolk Downs. I wonder if the superior airport access of SD offers greater tax revenue potential over Everett? I imagine that is something that the committee/board/thing will consider heavily.

It is hard to imagine that there is an alternative high tax-revenue use for the Everett site, while there are clearly tax-lucrative and good-urbanism uses for Suffolk Downs. Those uses are probably nowhere near as lucrative as the casino, but Everett Casino + SD anything is most certainly better for state coffers than SD casino + Everett stripmall/big-box/non-TOD use.
 
fattony said:
Everett Casino + SD anything is most certainly better for state coffers than SD casino + Everett stripmall/big-box/non-TOD use.
Click to expand...
Nicely put.

{and given how far SD is from Back Bay or Seaport (2-seat transit, or a long 1A shuttle)...Everett via 1-seat shuttle bus is good for conventioneers}
 
Last edited:
davem said:
It's not about affordability or car ownership. Its about driving in Boston sucking in general, really sucking in the vicinity of both casino sites, and people from the area knowing that. I still haven't heard an answer as to why people/tourists who take the T to do other things in town (symphony, concerts, museums, clubs, fancy dinners, sports, whatever) are going to not want to do that to go to a casino.

I also haven't seen an example of a casino in an urban area with a large transit riding population for comparison. Vegas, Atlantic City and Foxwoods are terrible examples. People drive there because they have no choice, and even then there are casino buses. I don't gamble (because I'm really good at wasting my money all on my own), but my friends do. Every single person I know who drives to Foxwoods complains about having to drive there, and says that if they didn't have to they would go more often. My girlfriend and I both own cars, but I take the T to the Cambridgeside galleria, and when the casino opens I will be taking it to get there to check it out too.

Marketing to the local populous, however, allows him to tap into the existing pool of college kids, conventioneers, tourists, and residents. It doesn't fill hotel rooms or leave people sitting at a table or slot machine for days at a time, but it does guarantee a steady stream of money coming in from people looking for something to do on a saturday. It also requires a very small investment to tap into: some sort of connection to the existing transit system. These are people who are already here and are looking for something new to do. He just has to get them through the door.
Click to expand...

Davem -- remember that the oft quoted 1.3 Million T riders include some who take the T because they have no other option and most who take the T because for a particular trip it offers the best option. Almost all of the latter also have access to a car. In particular nearly everyone who commutes to Boston on the Commuter Rail drives to the CR stop.

Also, outside of a small weekday daytime contingent -- large resort-type casinos do most of their business on Friday nights and weekends. I doubt that many CR riders M-F world do anything other than drive to Wynn or Suffolk on a weekend.

The high rollers will take a Black Car and most tourists a taxi. The only T riders will be workers at the hotel and casino. A workers bus to Sullivan just like the 128 shuttle to Alewife will meet most of the requirements
 
choo said:
I could see Wynn or private operator running a ferry from Southie convention center to the casino when there are big conventions. Walk to legal harbor side or fan pier, hop on go across the harbor have a beer on board and jump off right at the Wynn. Big conventions would like that because be serious, if 15k are at mcca they are not going silver red to orange to walk from Wellington to get there. And Wynn and the state should be getting as much out of town money there as possible. It's like a 25% bonus on our tax revenue.
Click to expand...

Choo -- Yes you are right on target -- the Mystic Connection -- that has been missing from our discussion

If I was Wynn I start talking immediately to BHC about providing Casino Cruises from both Seaport World Trade Center [aka Commonwealth Pier] and from Rowe's Wharf

This of course is most likely in the Summer with shoulders on Spring and Autumn

These might run every weekend throughout most of the year and of course for major events at BCEC and Seaport World Trade Center

There might even be a possibility of Wynn providing a marina for high rollers to park their yachts

The above, just might be the Wynning hand :=} with the Commission
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top