Front pages:
2007

December

November

October

September

Aug. 14 - 30

Aug. 1 - 13

July 25 - July 31

July 24 - 26

July 7 - 24

June 26 - July 3

A response to Frank Dunphy from CasinoFacts

4/10/08 In a letter to The Middleboro Gazette CasonoFacts member Frank Dunphy brings up a number of points which he states as outright facts. However, while there are elements of truth in all he brings up, none are as factual as he makes them out to be.

He begins by complaining about some casino proponents comparing other large venues with a casino by noting how different a casino would be. It is true that a casino is very different than, say a shopping mall, However, while a casino in indeed open 24 hours a day, the volume of traffic I would think isn't constant with fewer cars in the wee hours of the morning. There is a reasonable comparison to be made between traffic to and from a mall open for 12 hours and a casino open for 24.

It seems to be common sense that more drinking will occur at a casino than at any other business of its size built on that site. However, it remains to be seen how that will translate into impaired driving incidents since we don't know how well the casino will monitor customers who are overindulging. I for one expect and hope they will be responsible barkeeps.

Dunphy's statement about a casino employing more low wage earners than other businesses of course depends on the businesses he compares it to. I hardly think he believes the casino would pay less than, say, a WalMart. He also says that those who earn lower on the pay scale would be inclined to be renters in Middleboro where their children would overburden out schools. He may be correct, but this is an unknown. Perhaps the majority would continue to live where they already live.

I can't really address Dunphy's concern about teenagers taking after school or summer jobs at the casino since I don't know how many of these would be available, or what they would be. I do know that if the casino does hire teenaged workers they can't be in the gaming areas and would probably be working in the restaurants, shops and outside on landscape and golf course crews.

He doesn't want his children working or socializing in a casino environment, but there are probably other parents that would be delighted if their son or daughter got a job in a clean and safe environment like a resort casino.

I am afraid that many casino opponents are still getting some issues on the topic of casino gambling addition, if not wrong, at least half-wrong.

Dunphy says that casinos "are set up on the premise of addiction." This is, I believe, totally false. Casinos are set up as an entertainment diversion based on a very common desire of people to spend money in tryng to beat the odds, hoping to win something of value, and have fun while doing it. If casinos counted on making money off of the aproximately 5% of the population who are problem gamblers or gambling addicts, some of whom eventually go broke, the casinos would go out of business.

As Dunphy notes, the casinos major revenue generator is the slot machine. He has everything right about them, and in fact leaves a great deal out. In the early days even with mechanical innards they weren't called one armed bandits for nothing. Suffice to say that they are brilliantly designed to more or less painlessly separate players from their money. I do want to offer two corrections.

First, he says that the machines are designed scientifically (which of course they are) to "help patrons part with their hard earned money rather quickly." I believe quite the opposite is true. My understanding is that the machines payout percentages are calculated to allow the patron to keep winning small amounts over a long period of time, but ultimately to loose just a bit more than was played. The continued small wins is what keeps them playing, and provides the ongoing rushes of excitement in the expectation (false as it is) that they are getting close to a bigger win.

Second, while Dunphy says people play the slots because of the "lure of the big jackpot" my sense is that this is only a small part of what attracts players. In fact, most of the slot machines I saw in my casino visits offered fairly modest jackpots of between $2,000 and $10,000. In fact, in some states casinos at least used to set the jackpot on many machines at $1,199 since winners have to report $1,200 to the IRS.

I've said it before and probably will have to say it again. There are only a few incontrovertible "facts" about casinos. I'd like to see proponents and opponents who want to bathe themselves in the light on omniscient knowledge step back and recognize there are complex issues at play here. Nobody has all the answers.

COMMENT HERE | 0 COMMENTS

Comments

4/11/08

I read the letter and found nothing unique or surprising it it. Nor do I find any earth shaking developments in blogs, CFO or casino-friend. This is just more of the same old.

I travel frequently and make a point of going to casinos where ever I go. I have reported on my experiences in Arizona and New Mexico and the latest being California. I posted these personal observations on this site and on another site that generally takes an opposing point of view. Let me refresh my own observations from talking with employees, town folks and business people.

1. The economic impact is not what it is being played out to be. Minimal where I went. Casino is viewed as "just being there." Talked to a regional director of Sysco who said the Harrah's Resort and Temecula casino had "no real impact on their business." I spoke to a limo owner who said "Airport runs and wine country tours are his seller." In areas where there is little economic development the casino did not spur any significant (note - significant) growth. In the other ares substantial development was already taking place.

2. Traffic is a non issue.

3. Schools are a non issue.

4. Jobs pay reasonable wages and are competitive in their market. Benefits are fine. Middle of the road. Some labor issues have surfaced and they have been resolved. Nothing that would raise a red flag. Some Indians are becoming very, very rich.

5. Real estate has been of zero concern in the four California areas I went to visit. Casinos are somewhat remote. In Up state Washington a few years ago it was a bit different as two agents I spoke to said it dropped some values and raised others in the area. All location and demand. It does not seem to be an issue at TR, Foxwoods or Mohegan Sun.

6. Addiction is obviously going to arise with a casino. That is an absolute given. Some are willing to accept the damage and some are not.

This does not mean Middleboro will fit the profile of the above. This is just what I found out from talking to employee's, townies, business folks and even other tourist - I was surprised when I asked about 20 people at a winery in Temecula if they planned on a casino visit? Answer was clear - all said "no."

Scientific? Probably not depending upon your point of view on different sections of the issue. But it also gave me a personal one and one insight. Similar to Hal's visit to a casino.

Rick McNair

Middleboro