what forms the
basis of your brand of "targetted success" which effectively
disputes AndrewPKYap's
original statement?
In what way was my
targeted success a dispute? In the first place if you are going to
draw a point on a pcs of paper and claim that it is outside a
circle the 1st response is where are the lines. That is
why I said u got nothing better to do driving aimlessly.
Read below
:
ATLANTIC
CITY: BEFORE AND AFTER
In 1976, the citizens of
New Jersey voted to legalize casino gambling in Atlantic City. It's
instructive to compare the promises made during that campaign to
the actual benefits seen in the state 30 years later.
Promise:
33,690 new jobs in the state by 1985, including
24,600 in casino hotels
Reality: 44,542 people directly employed by
the casinos
Promise: $844 million in new
construction by 1985
Reality: $12.4 billion in capital investments
by casinos*
Promise: $330 million in new wages by
1985
Reality: Annual payroll of $1.25 billion
(includes tips but not benefits)
Promise: $30.3 million in annual casino
tax revenue to benefit senior citizens
Reality: $508.78 in tax revenue in 2005 to
benefit seniors, disabled, economic revitalization
programs
By looking at the
numbers in terms of payroll and property the number looks
impressive but we can always argue that it fail because only
$508.78 gone into tax revenue for social benefit.
so at the end of the day what is the domain of "Hope to Fail"
Lies.
what is your targeted
success? failure to attract high roller? and foreign visitor?
I don't think they were intended to target local Sg. After all most
singaporean are mediocre income.
Unless you're hopelessly dyslexic (which you might very well
claim to be in a veiled attempt to emerge with any credibility),
are you for a moment suggesting the above (in red) actually implies
"targeted success" should entail the inclusion of locals in the
consumer base of any casino-operating region? Or are you saying the
gaming ventures in Singapore should only be successful if they
manage to target high rollers and foreign visitors?
Perhaps, (while awaiting your response to the abovementioned) to
illustrate your dire lack of logic and how
you're effectively driving around aimlessly on your drunken
stupor with incoherent sense, you may wish to consider how
fallacious your point of putting Genting in the league of Macau/Las
Vegas actually is.
If you actually know what you're even talking about, it
shouldn't escape your eyes that
Las Vegas and Macau raked in between US$6.5billion and
US$6.95billion respectively in 2006 (source :
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTWqxxBfz_B8&refer=home).
Genting, on the other hand, only churned out US$1.89 billion for
the same period (source : http://www.hotelsmag.com/articleXml/LN790010216.html).
Surely, your rudimentary mathematics can't be suggesting that
Genting actually qualifies as being in the same breadth as Las
Vegas and Macau with under 1/3 of the revenue generated by the 2
behemoths, can you?
Or am I led to believe your logic dictates the impact of any
city/area operating a casino would have an equally significant
influence on its industry as your overzealous anecdote
"The answer is Life Style. (U
forgot to mention Genting.) " would suggest?
