Yeah, from the very start, this felt like the only no-brainer of any of the NYC proposals. I’d be very surprised if it doesn’t get approved and ultimately awarded one of the licenses.
2 Likes
So basically, these casinos will only (or primarily) be for locals. Almost no tourist is going all the way out to outer Queens or Coney Island for casinos unless they’re serious gamblers.
Seems like a lot of (tourist) money left on the table… but oh well
3 Likes
1 Like
A tragic loss. This one would be an excellent revenue stream for Coney Island since it’s largely a seasonal place for tourists and since the casino is indoors, it’s an activity that can be done in the winter.
With Coney Island potentially dead, the last reasonably decent one left is the Citi Field one. The rest are mediocre and aren’t exactly in areas with excellent transit hubs.
4 Likes
Yonkers is going to get its full license and NYC is going to shoot down all of its proposals and benefit nothing after all of this. Its the Amazon HQ2 thing all over again.
5 Likes
flushing is a hot spot for tourism now thanks to the food scene and its a 20 min commute via lirr. definitely doable for tourists
So the Citifield design might be the only good proposal left standing after all. And those absolutely terrible proposals in Queens and Yonkers. Sigh.
Like someone else already said, now the only people who will be gambling here are New Yorkers and not tourists. NYC shoots itself in the foot, again and again and again.
4 Likes
as Manhattan will not be getting a casino and will soon not even have horse-drawn carriages or pedicabs anymore, there will be clearly be no reason for tourists to visit Manhattan /s
5 Likes
I am not surprised that the casinos’ were voted down to be honest.
What real benefits does it bring to the community? This isn’t the middle of nowhere. They are also the antithesis of NYC. They are completely enclosed spaces that are meant to confine people indoors (so you lose track of time and gamble more) without any association to the outside world, such as retail. Basically a suburban mall.
7 Likes
True, it might be a growing hotspot for tourism*, which is great, but it’s not at all where most tourists go and I doubt ever will be in the foreseeable future
*Also Astoria, Queens has come on the map as a growing foodie tourist hotspot btw
As someone on SSP said… Fine, in that case, if you’re a neighborhood representative that voted a casino down in your neck of the woods for these reasons, then you should get zero of the financial benefits of a casino built in another neighborhood. If you’re so concerned about the negatives of a casino and vote it down then you should forfeit the eventual winnings (pun intended). It’s giving Jersey-wanting-congestion-charge-monies-but-doesn’t-want-congestion-charge self-centeredness.
Like @YIMHudson, I also immediately thought of Amazon HQ2 failure. Community representatives letting perfect be the enemy of the good, and shooting their community/city in the foot in the process.
3 Likes
I do not see how the Amazon HQ2 failure even applies here. Amazon would have brought high paying jobs to Queens as opposed to a casino that is going to pay mostly service level salaries. That was a real loss.
Amazon’s HQ wouldn’t have required investment into Gamblers Addiction programs, crime prevention and the general increase of bankruptcy’s that casino’s bring with them. The increase of traffic for me is a non-issue.
2 Likes
Are you for real??? This is absolutely on the level of Amazon HQ2. The casinos will generate billions in upfront fees and hundreds of millions annually in gaming tax revenue. A portion of casino revenue is specifically earmarked for public services. The MTA is expected to be a major beneficiary of downstate licenses, for example. They have pledged to build tens of thousands of new [‘affordable’] housing. The Coney Island proposal, for example, offered to create $200 million “community” funds that politicians would help control if the projects are approved. Other proposals have offered similar amounts.
If you are arguing that casinos shouldn’t be built anywhere because the social problems will always outweigh any amount of financial benefit, then that’s a different discussion that can be had. But that’s not where we’re at. In the discussion of where already-approved casinos should go to maximize financial benefit, I think the answer is super clear. This is a huge loss of potential city revenue, imo.
2 Likes
Are you for real? The community board took into account whether the social problems were worth the obvious tax revenue generated by gaming. And they decided no. You can even read it in the article for the Coney that they did not believe the Casino would keep its word regarding community benefits.
This isn’t a discussion of revenue generation in a vacuum, because if it was then it would have been approved.
And I am also not arguing that casino’s shouldn’t be built anywhere but building them in very urban center does not make sense. This isn’t Vegas or Atlantic City where your likely only there to gamble.
And if you really want to fund the MTA with casino money, just let the MTA put in slot machines on the mezzanines. They can keep all their revenue instead of just a portion.
1 Like
And the community representatives that shot down Amazon HQ2 probably thought the same.. that the social problems were somehow not worth the obvious tax revenue and economic knock-on effects generated by Amazon.
Doesn’t mean they were right in either case.
That was my original point.
It’s the only place that makes sense lol.
1 Like
Amazon hasn’t even built what they said they were going to build in Virginia. And wasn’t that shot down due to the huge subsidies involved?
2 Likes
Yes. -
We have our first casino approval! Vote was unanimous.
11 Likes
With the two existing casinos approved, the focus shifts to the remaining three. Bally’s in the Bronx and the Coney in Brooklyn will be on Monday, and the Metropolitan on Tuesday.
3 Likes