Hey, there! Log in / Register

Changing Perceptions

The release last week of Steve Wynn's plans for a stunning high rise hotel and casino on a contaminated piece of land jutting out into the Mystic River on the Boston/Everett line was matched by Suffolk Downs 3D release of its stunning plans for the sprawling Suffolk Downs race track site on land shared by Boston/Revere.

Wynn did his thing and then Suffolk Downs did theirs.

These presentations again marked another moment to note in the evolving contest which pits Richard Fields and Caesars Palace versus Steve Wynn for licensing rights to several billion dollars in revenues in the short term over the coming years.

The growing perception – and this may in fact be different from the harsh reality – is that Wynn's Everett gambit is gaining an edge in the bragging rights department over Suffolk Downs gamble in Boston/Revere.

The talk among nearly all of those involved with the casino licensing conundrum - lobbyists, local politicians, consultants, businesspeople and gamblers – Wynn appears to be gaining in perception over his archrival.

In the end it will be anyone's guess what exactly the Gaming Commission will vote to do and why. That being said, perception will have a lot to do with the decision.

This includes the David Nunes/Foxwoods Milford proposal which has not yet taken on shape and form for the public. The Gaming Commission could end up picking that investment group and suburban location over the Everett and Boston/Revere locations. That is unlikely but then in the present day licensing/political climate anything is possible.

The crucial moment of selection is still way off but the situation is fluid.

Wynn and his supporters boast he has more money, bigger vision, a grander plan, more raw casino management and financing skill and power than anyone else fighting for a license in Massachusetts.

Wynn's empire is cash rich. His casinos, wherever in the world they are located, are like richly appointed royal palaces more than anything else. On a personal note, Wynn sold a Picasso from his extensive personal collection of fine art last week for $155 million!

Last week, Suffolk reported losing one of its 19% partners, who pulled out of their proposed casino plan at Suffolk Downs. Vornado Realty Trust pulled out rather than undergo close vetting and scrutiny process as required by the gaming commission.

It is believed Vornado's share will be picked up by one of the Suffolk Downs partners or close colleagues.

At the same time that announcement was made, Mayor Thomas Menino, one of the venerated track's most influential and loyal supporters, delivered a farewell speech of sorts at Faneuil Hall.

Despite the efforts of Suffolk Downs officials to minimize the effects or importance of Vornado stepping aside and the mayor not running again, these two significant events were a bit like losing an important double-header when in the significant moment of a late season baseball pennant drive.

Yet Suffolk Downs officials said no one should get excited over such occurrences.

Tell that to Wynn's development group, his lawyers at Mintz Levin, and his supporters in Everett. All three of those groups were ebullient last week and talked as though the bidding war and the application battle is all over with Wynn the clear winner. How easily people forget that not many months have passed since Wynn was thrown out of Foxboro by anti-casino forces led by Republican senatorial candidate Dan Winslow.

Winslow said at a fundraiser held in Newbury over the weekend that if he gains the Republican nomination at the end of April, he will go straight to Everett and make every effort to ruin Wynn's bid as well as to stop casino gambling – which he opposes.

Wynn and his folks ought to hold off on early celebrations. Announcing and even believing the victory has already been won before the outcome of the battle has been determined is bad war strategy.

Suffolk Downs has already been there, and if there is an advantage in all of this for them, it is that Wynn would appear to have taken a frontrunner status in the bid to be affirmed by the Gaming Commission.

Suffolk Downs is now the underdog.

The mayor remains a strong supporter but the mayor cannot be expected to deliver politically six to nine months from now the support he would have been capable of had he run again.

The mayor not running for re-election is a blow for Suffolk Downs.

Another oddity for outsiders looking into the casino crystal ball is to try to understand how Suffolk Downs officials at the highest level believe Wynn is bluffing with his Everett proposal.

They honestly believe he will never build anything in Everett. They believe he will make a bid to build a casino on the emerging Southie waterfront.
The Suffolk Downs folks believe Wynn is all about bluff.

This may in fact turn out to be the case. However, Wynn does not appear to be much of a bluffer.

For all intents and purposes the Everett site is a Boston waterfront site. A casino put there would be a Boston casino by any other name. A promise by Wynn to take care of Everett and Boston with mitigation funding will capture an awful lot of interest with mayoral candidates and even with Menino. News that Wynn is buying other parcels abutting the parcel which he has leased gives rise to that belief.

The Mintz Levin connection for Wynn should also be of more than casual interest and cause for alarm for Suffolk Downs.

Mr. Crosby the head of the Gaming Commission was once a big time William Weld man when Weld was governor.

While great efforts are made to assure the public that Crosby is Mr. Clean, one has to wonder about him and his former boss Weld, who now works for Mintz Levin in the same division representing Wynn.


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Adam, in the name of full disclosure; are you getting paid for this soapbox (on both sides), or do you have any underlying interest?

Not that it's a huge deal, but it is weird seeing PR speak editorials and shrilling for these giant interests on UHubs homepage. Personally I come here for local news and quirky internet humor, not to really to be fed a bunch of sugar coated bullshit from someone not being entirely honest (or even engaged) with what is coming out of his laptop.

up
Voting closed 0

I find them interesting. Given the layers of secretive dealmaking that have to be taking place I appreciate the occasional attempt to throw some light on the process. If you don't want to read it you don't have to.

up
Voting closed 0

The piece was not written by Adam and the author's name is clearly posted. It's an opinion piece. I'm sure Adam would post an op-ed piece if you wanted to submit one.

up
Voting closed 0

I know that.

But it's weird to see Mr. Resnek joined the site only 6 weeks back and already has had 3-4 front page posts, without any real introduction or information surrounding his involvement with what he is promoting. I believe on the last post someone dug up some information that he isn’t exactly just a concerned citizen with an opinion on what should be done concerning a casino in Boston (even if also true) as these editorials try to come across. He seems to have a personal (financial/relation?) stake in it. If they’re PR and ads, they should said as such. If they’re to be taken seriously, full disclosure of Mr. Resnek involvement with a potential casino (or the people that desperately want one) should be made aware to us.

I guess I’m just looking for a little more transparency, and am wondering if these are paid advertisements (in money or favor), or real editorials. That prior to six weeks ago we’ve never seen anything like this is, well, just curious. And just the way it reads screams (not so) carefully crafted PR release, and not really a true engagement with people that might be on the fence on who, if what to support.

(And it wouldn’t hurt for Mr. Resnek to engage the people he’s trying to win over here in the comments section too)

up
Voting closed 0

Actually I agree. There are other people who post on UHub on and off, but I can't recall any other newspaper publishers or other media types who are having their detritus broadcast on our favorite home-town source for local news. If thezak was sending you poorly written diatribes on open government I wouldn't expect to see them posted as UHub entries (postings under entries, yes).

While I wouldn't censor Mr. Resnek's editorials - I don't know why you aren't posting links to the East Boston Times (of course not all of these articles may be there, I haven't checked). It's an interesting news story in Boston and has an impact on the lives of folks not only in Eastie but across the whole city (and beyond), so it merits a mention, but why does Resnek get a space here for direct postings/propaganda when that seems to happen rarely?

I don't know if disclosure is the right word, but it seems like some 'splainin would be in order. Mr. Resnek is part of a project that reeks a whole lot of "inside job" so by just allowing him the space here without comment it sets of alarms which may not be warranted, but it would be nice to know a bit more.

up
Voting closed 0

So he doesn't have that particular soapbox anymore.

The casino issue is a pretty important one for one particular Boston neighborhood, so when he and I had coffee a few weeks back, I thought something like this might be a way to open up more discussion on the topic.

up
Voting closed 0

Well that explains it! I hadn't realized that Josh was no longer working at the East Boston Times.

up
Voting closed 0

I thought Josh would have an interesting perspective on the casino issue, given that he was, until recently, editor for a chain of newspapers that covered both East Boston and Revere.

You'll notice at the Casinos page, I'm also now running posts by Steve Holt, who is opposed to an East Boston casino. The index page just went live today, but Steve started writing a couple weeks ago (mea culpa for being so slow in setting up an overall Casinos page).

up
Voting closed 0

Thanks for the disclosure.

up
Voting closed 0

Josh Resnek, that piece is terribly written. You ought to run your stuff by an editor before you publish.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

I'm pretty opposed to any gambling in MA but having read Josh's shrill arguments for Suffolk Downs I'm rooting for the Everett site if there has to be one around Boston. If these editorials represent the way the Suffolk Downs people think and act, they deserve to loose.

BTW Josh, did you see the Globe Survey this morning showing more people have strong opposition to Suffolk Downs then are strongly in favor of it? It's only getting overall support by a small percentage of the city, contrary to your previous editorial claiming the opposition was tiny.

up
Voting closed 0

Don't forget there's another proposal out there, a bit vague, for a casino in Milford that is also in competition with Wynn and Suffolk Downs. That would at least get this thing out to 495. Craptastic for traffic out there, but at least not the clusterfuck that a casino in the urban core would be.

Realistically I don't see people going out for a fancy night on the town "gaming" away their entertainment dollars while humming the "Wonder of it All" taking the T to the casino. The only city locale that makes sense to me is the South Boston waterfront as that is where the convention center is as well as a cluster of new hotels and out-of-town car-less tourists looking for a good time. But Milford sounds even better to me. Busloads of retirees being carted in like cattle to be fleeced of their metamucil money; limos of drunken assholes looking to become bigger, drunker yet poorer assholes; vans of undocumented immigrants being trucked in to clean up the facilities after the promised union jobs contracts lapse and they justify hiring non-union contractors because "it's the only way to keep this venture financially viable;" and whoever else wants to drive out there to lose money, get free drinks and rubbery hors d'oeuvres and have a fun time.

That's where I'd prefer it, but I don't know what people in Milford think about that.

up
Voting closed 0

Logistically makes the most sense if you want it to be a destination. I could see going out there for a show and dinner from time to time and throwing a few bucks away on the black jack table. Unquestionably this should be a waterfront hotel (like the Everett proposal but seriously - Everett?) with harbor facing restaurants, a highe end Vegas level casino and theaters for live shows and possibly movies. Suffolk Downs? - just ain't goin' there to shove quarters in a hole - and not heading to the burbs either.

Granted - as an occasional recreational gambler more interested in food and a show, I'm not their target audience, but I would think drawing in the convention crowd would be worth their while.

up
Voting closed 0

It be easy to get there from the highways with the pike. There’s room, and not really much residency down there yet. You can also build up a lot of stuff around it, making it the centerpiece of a neighborhood, along with the convention center.

I don’t think it would ever happen though, because there’s already a small number of people who paid a good $500k-$1mill for their luxury condos in some of the towers down there. No way in hell would they support anything that brings in the plebs, traffic and noise to their towers gates.

up
Voting closed 0

That Picasso that he just sold for $155 million is the same one that he put his elbow through a year or so ago and had repaired. I wonder what the price would have been undamaged.

up
Voting closed 0

The fact that the Suffolk people were able to get the legislature to make sure that Boston as a whole is not allowed to vote on the casino, (as every other city that is being asked to host one of these will be able to), but only those in East Boston, should give all who live in Boston a lot to fear. What was Suffolk so scared of?

up
Voting closed 0

I'm not so sold that the part of this town that already has to deal with tolls to get to the rest of the city, poor public transportation in comparision and the headaches of Logan wants another attraction that only pulls in more outsiders looking to pass through.

up
Voting closed 0

East Boston has been asked to endure the two harbor tunnels and now a third, the Ted Williams, and Logan Airport with 22 million visitors a year passing through on their way to Boston.

There has never been a citywide referendum asking the residents of Boston outside of the affected East Boston neighborhood as to the efficacy of locating an airport there or three harbor tunnels. No one in any of Boston's neighborhoods would have welcomed it and none of the good people living in those neighborhoods stood up for the rights and the health and well being of East Boston's residents when the tunnels nearly destroyed the neighborhoods charm and the airport, its health and well-being.

It is up to the people of East Boston and Revere to decide whether or not they want to vote for a casino to locate in their cities and neighborhoods. It isn't up to the people living in Dorchester, West Roxbury, Jamaica Plain, Hyde Park, Beacon Hill or Back Bay.

The people of East Boston and Revere have a chance to have their say on something important to them.

up
Voting closed 0

...if we had 10 others opening at the same time. Oh, wait, we don't, because we have an artificial limit on casinos.

Next time any of you use the term "Masshole" or wonder why anybody who lives here is a jerk, it's because everybody is out for themselves and is greedy. I mean, it's okay to be human and have those traits, but don't be so shocked when those traits manifest themselves into things like "state gaming commission comprised of members with six figure salaries who have never touched a slot handle or dealt a poker hand" and "limit of three casino licenses and one slot license for a state of 6.6 million people."

People who have more money than you and are friends with more powerful and important people than you made those decisions. Because of this, we have a scenario in which Eastie, instead of getting a modest gaming facility with modest traffic, will suffer with several months of Los Angeles rush hour-level traffic until the novelty of pent-up casino gaming demand in this state subsides.

I stood in line for 50 minutes to eat a (expletive) Shake Shack hamburger last week. And that's a frickin' burger joint. The demand to play cards and slots and craps and roulette is FAR higher. But since we can magically start being adults and having those things in 2011, er, when it finally gets approved and built, it's going to get stuck up the (expletive) of poor brown people who live in East Boston and Revere.

That's not on them for being poor, that's on our state's culture of "because (expletive) you." Until we as a people go out of our way to declare that culture repugnant, we're going to have a casino and its short-term problems either in East Boston, Everett, or Milford.

up
Voting closed 0

Get an editor, bro.

up
Voting closed 0

I guess you experience some difficulty with the English language. Also, I remain in awe of weepers like yourself who enjoy insulting the efforts of others but never sign their real name to their insults.

up
Voting closed 0

There are a number of race tracks outside the city [and once in the city] that used to be for dogs and horses. They are fairly seedy and thankfully in the case of the dog tracks, finally no longer hold races.

But instead of trying to turn them into respectable establishments you see them lobbying for slot machines.

You know what there are absolutely none of in Eastern Mass? Race tracks, as in for cars. I realize that those former sites for dog and horse racing are not big enough sites for a real road course but they might fit a paved short track. Even if too small for that you could hold sprint car races at least as well as other dirt track events.

The best thing about race tracks, as in for cars, is there is not really any legitimized gambling involved.

I would also recommend setting up a street course, on blocked streets, once a year in the seaport area, much like is done in Long Beach or Miami. Next year NYC/NJ is going to have a F1 race along the Hudson. Why can't we have something?

up
Voting closed 0

This just gets better and better. They really should have just set up a poll beforehand to see what urban "amenities" people really want. Alienstripclubunicornpettingzoospaceshuttleburningmanbranson - yeah!

up
Voting closed 0

You can be sure of one thing Josh Resnek. You do a lot of yakking with very little insight about what you're talking about. The fact that New Hampshire will very likely approve of a casino at the Rockingham Park Racetrack and be in operation before any location in Ma. breaks ground, makes both the proposed Suffolk and Wynn locations a horrible option for the Gaming Commission. Wynn's location in Foxboro was the second best location in the state behind the Milford location. Unfortunately Wynn and Kraft thought they could steamroll the freak show put on by nofoxborocasino without much effort and tried to engage the anti-casino zealots who took over the town with niceties of protocol. There are dozens of people throughout the gaming industry that know without question that the best option and location remaining in the East section is the Milford location off of 495. If Nunes and Butera are serious and can ward off the CasinoFreeMilford freak show and gain a yes vote in a referendum in the town of Milford, Suffolk and Wynn can kiss their proposals goodbye. You can book it. Urban casino locations as put forth by Suffolk and Wynn are not favorable and you can count on the racing commission feeling the same way from the rumblings coming from the industry.

If Deval Patrick had used his brains instead of whining about "no bid" contracts and insisting on three resort casinos and one slot parlor instead of the original bill, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Suffolk Downs is suited to be a slot parlor at best. A destination resort casino at that location is a nightmare and a farce and nothing - including Caesars and "going green" - can change that fact. The waste dump in Everett is even worse and Wynn knows it. The only thing keeping him here is ego after what happened in Foxboro. You calling the Nunes/Foxwoods proposal that will be put forth a long shot, is laughable.

up
Voting closed 0

You, Suffolk, and Wynn are in for a very rude awakening if you think the Nunes/Foxwoods Milford 495 location is a long shot for the bid. Insiders within the industry have in fact called it the best location in the state for a proposed resort casino.

up
Voting closed 0