[gristle]

And that's a bad thing because....? It's business, if you ran a business, but didn't want to steel other competitors customers, you'd be out of business pretty damn fast. I'm not saying yes or no to the casino, but as for attracting new business to Toronto, that's a good thing. The more business the better for us. Quite frankly, if other cities can't compete, then they need to make their product more appealing if they wish to succeed, and it's nothing personal, but the more jobs we can create due to increased business in Toronto, the better.

No, it isn't the same. Some of the the proceeds from the casino will be used to subsidize the other parts of the casino development (stores, theatre, hotel, etc). That doesn't happen typically outside a development like this. The idea is to maintain an advantage for those businesses within the casino facility. That will keep casino visitors inside as much as possible. That also means a disadvantage for other nearby non-casino competitors. So yes, in effect they will be able to "steel" (sic) away from other businesses by undercutting them.

The casino operator applicant hasn't made a clear case for what it can do for the city. Instead, it has become quite clear that they are counting on the city to do for them - as in being a place where they can poach what exists. In short, that doesn't translate into attracting "business" or even much in the way of job creation. It's about attracting "business" (tourists) to the casino and keeping them inside the casino facilities as much as possible.

Finally, healthy shopping districts are about critical mass and retail diversity. Take a good look at many casinos. They turn their backs on the city. They are built as a facilities unto themselves.

 

[Hanlansboy]

you're definitely not alone in your prejudice towards casinos, people seem to be afraid of them, as if it's some evil monster attacking our fair city. I won't say it's paranoid delusion, but you cannot expect the same thing to happen here as has happened in other major cities that got a casino for several reasons. I know there are two sides to every argument, and I'm not going to waste my time disputing it, I just wish people would approach this a little more open minded, and less fearful it will destroy the city. I can respect what you're saying, but I seriously doubt a casino is going to hold its guests hostage, that's absolutely ridiculous! It's common knowledge that many casinos design their gaming areas to encourage you to keep playing, even withholding the current time so people don't know how long they've spent gambling (ie good luck finding a clock on the wall) but I think you're not giving the general public enough credit. If someone's goal is to do nothing but gamble while there, who are we to say they shouldn't? But, there are many, many more tourist traps, ops, I mean, attractions, in Toronto, that will benefit the increased tourism that a casino will bring. I can't see someone spending their entire vacation trapped on the gambling floor, sounds like the prelude to a Stephen King horror! I have no doubt the casino will attempt to lure as much business from their guests as possible, but I honestly believe most people would want to see more then just that. We have so much more, particularly in the MTCC (assuming Oxford got the contract) area. The CN Tower (which also lures visitors by means of building the only exit through the gift shop), our soon to be aquarium, the CNE (and the many trade shows that happen there), the Eatons Centre, the many theatres we have (minus the Princess of Whales if Gerhy is approved), the AGO, hundreds of restaurants, the waterfront attractions......my point is, ALL of these are tourist traps, for that after, most of the downtown core is geared towards tourism, and that's great, it's a huge industry for us. If we do indeed get a casino, from a business point of view, it will 100% guaranteed increase business for the many other tourist attractions so many rely on for their livelihood. I won't get into the ethical argument of gambling addicts, there are already tens of thousands of them, without a casino, go figure....the only logical aspect I have against it, is the nightmare of parking, and public transit, or lack thereof. If it is built, they desperately have to improve public access and parking before the first nail is hammered.

 

[TOareaFan]

No, it isn't the same. Some of the the proceeds from the casino will be used to subsidize the other parts of the casino development (stores, theatre, hotel, etc). That doesn't happen typically outside a development like this. The idea is to maintain an advantage for those businesses within the casino facility. That will keep casino visitors inside as much as possible. That also means a disadvantage for other nearby non-casino competitors. So yes, in effect they will be able to "steel" (sic) away from other businesses by undercutting them.

Is that really how it works? Serious question because I thought that any retailers/services inside would pay higher rents on the promise/potential of the foot traffic the casino/hotel operations would provide....if they are charged higher rents then the notion of them undercutting nearby businesses does not seem likely. More likely that they would be premium priced retail operations working on their convenience rather than price leaders.

In a way, like retailers at airports.......doubt any of those are selling their wares cheaper than you could get the same things prior to going to the airport. Airports are also notorious for charging high rents to their retail tenants because they deliver that captive/in a spending mood/targetted audience.

 

[vz64]

A surprisingly critical take on the proposed casino plans in Dailycommercialnews:

A casino for Toronto is a bad gamble for all

A.J. DIAMOND, SANDRA GAROSSINO,

KEN GREENBERG, ROB SIMPSON

contributors

Boosters of more casinos in Ontario – 29 are planned with at least one for the City of Toronto — trot out a stock list of justifications for them. It is claimed that casinos create jobs, stimulate urban development, attract tourism, provide amenities for families and generate net revenue for governments.

The potential social problems casinos create and a full accounting of costs and impacts are not addressed by these boosters.


Related:

A casino for Toronto a good gamble?â€

OLG wants to put a casino in Toronto, ‘largest development’ project in Canada

Let us take the arguments in favour of casinos one by one.

Job creation:
Gambling is among the lowest job-creation sectors and the jobs are overwhelmingly low paid and without benefits.

Urban development stimulus:
Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan stated that a casino would be “an anchor that could create a golden mile on Toronto’s waterfront.â€

To attract this promised stimulus, these cities are persuaded to give up valuable land, commonly on waterfronts. Is the assertion true? What actually happens around these urban casinos?

The evidence is that not much of value to the city ensues. There is an unavoidable conflict between what is essentially a large, inward-focused, blank box of a building (plus its large parking lot) and the promotion of community activity.

While waterfront sites are appealing for their visibility, there is minimal desire on the part of the casino to foster any relationship with the adjoining waterfront or city beyond the controlled compound.

The once great seaside destination Atlantic City, with its grand boardwalk, bet the farm on a cluster of casinos and the promised prosperity they would bring.

What they have instead is a decimated downtown and a deteriorated city surrounding the walled casino enclaves and their parking lots. Financial support by the state and local authorities is necessary to rescue these derelict areas.

In Halifax the casino with its darkened windows and narrow, empty walkway on the harbour next to Purdy’s Landing shows the same pattern. So too do the casinos in St. Louis, Detroit and Windsor.

Tourism attraction:
Once gambling tourists arrive, the casino aims to keep them captive, focused on the slots and gambling tables, or using the hotels, restaurants, bars and clubs within its internal orbit.

But other types of “tourists†are also attracted. Loan sharks haunt casinos and approach gamblers who are near, or at the point of losing their stake. They offer high-interest loans to “help win their money back†and take personal and family information to ensure repayment. This has been well documented in British Columbia — it is part of organized crime operating in major casinos.

Money launderers are also present. These people deposit cash in “front money accounts,†play a little, then cash out with laundered money. Withdrawal tranches are kept under $10,000 to avoid federal reporting requirements.

Family amenities:
Casinos, nightclubs and bars and all that are associated with them are hardly the stuff of a family attraction.

Revenue generation:
Gambling is an extractive industry — it removes money from the economy. Every dollar spent is taken from other consumer purchases.

This means that if the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp.’s projected gambling revenue of $1.3-billion from a new casino and other gambling forms represents dollars in, they are offset by equal dollars out, redirected from the existing economy. A shell game.

The main beneficiaries are the casino operators and, to a much lesser degree, governments. Casino operators want more casinos because the house always wins and they make billions.

Governments want more casinos to raise revenue without apparently having to raise taxes.

However, the result in effect would be a tax on those least able to bear the financial burden. Most gamblers suffer financial loss and sometimes bankruptcy.

Approximately 35 per cent of all gambling revenue in Ontario comes from the 340,000 problem gamblers.

If all the social costs of gambling are considered, it is debatable whether governments gain net revenue.

And even if there were any fiscal gain, there is still the question of the morality of employing gambling as an instrument of public financing.

For a city, particularly one with a strong, healthy and diverse local economy like Toronto, to squander valuable lands based on faulty premises would be an egregious mistake.

Personally, I would agree to smaller venue (similar to what we see in Europe) and, maybe to allow only non-Torontonians to enter (similar to Monaco's casinos).

 

[Tuscani01]

A surprisingly critical take on the proposed casino plans in Dailycommercialnews:



Personally, I would agree to smaller venue (similar to what we see in Europe) and, maybe to allow only non-Torontonians to enter (similar to Monaco's casinos).

I would be completely against that. Why should you, or anyone, have the right to take away my right as a Torontonian to visit the casino if it were to be built? I am an adult and can make my own decisions. I don't need someone telling me what I can and cannot do, especially since under that scenario I would still be allowed to gamble outside of the city.

That would be ludicrous. If we are going to have a casino in the city, it should be open to everyone and the operator should be responsible for ensuring that they are not taking advantage of those who have gambling addictions. Make it part of the licensing agreements so the Province or City would have the power to shut them down in the case of a violation.

 

[gabe]

A surprisingly critical take on the proposed casino plans in Dailycommercialnews:

Job creation:
Gambling is among the lowest job-creation sectors and the jobs are overwhelmingly low paid and without benefits.

Not true. Higher-end casinos like MGM and Caesars have good benefits, higher wages and are typically unionized or they pay well enough to keep unions away, plus it deters employees from cheating. Full time higher paying positions in the hospitality business is exactly what the downtown needs.

 

[HotStuff]

sorry to be of topic.
i just wanna get my feelings out on what i think of this.
to me this is just a waste of space. The last thing i want in this city is twin buildings. its a good spot for a casino though. I'd rather have a smaller better looking building than a taller uglier one.

 

[rpeters]

a lot of these arguments smell like propoganda. they say the casino will suck the life out of downtown, and yet montreal has one and it's still a lively place. Also Montreal is the number one international event destination in north america, and it might be partially due to their casino! they say it will only be locals who go and they will spend all their money there instead of in the local economy, and yet it's being built as part of a CONVENTION CENTRE!!!!! where people FROM OUT OF TOWN go to see trade shows and recruitment events, etc, etc,. It's better our gambling junkies spend their money here than going to niagara or orillia and giving it to those regions. It's quite easy to go their and gamble, they even have free buses that pick you up downtown. Most importantly, if you can't control your gambling then get help, don't ruin everyone else's fun and blame the casinos, it's a rigged game and everyone knows it, have you no shame? that's like a fat person blaming mcdonalds or a smoker blaming the tabacco companies, just because you're a weak person and can't control your self.

 

[old boy]

a lot of these arguments smell like propoganda. they say the casino will suck the life out of downtown, and yet montreal has one and it's still a lively place. Also Montreal is the number one convention destination in north america, and it might be partially due to their casino! they say it will only be locals who go and they will spend all their money there instead of in the local economy, and yet it's being built as part of a CONVENTION CENTRE!!!!! where people FROM OUT OF TOWN go to see trade shows and recruitment events, etc, etc,. It's better our gambling junkies spend their money here than going to niagara or orillia and giving it to those regions. It's quite easy to go their and gamble, they even have free buses that pick you up downtown. Most importantly, if you can't control your gambling then get help, don't ruin everyone else's fun and blame the casinos, it's a rigged game and everyone knows it, have you no shame? that's like a fat person blaming mcdonalds or a smoker blaming the tabacco companies, just because you're a weak person and can't control your self.

Apart from the fact that Montreal is not the # 1 convention destination on the continent, the point is made that a casino in downtown Toronto would give the tourist one more reason to visit.

 

[mdparker]

Las Vegas is the #1 convention destination on the continent, with Orlando a close second... Don't know where Montreal stands but I'm a firm supporter of this project...

 

[Big Daddy]

Not so many years ago, many people were against putting a baseball/football stadium downtown (Skydome). There were cries of concern over traffic congestion and Parking issues. I think it's fair to say at this point that having the stadium downtown has provided great deal of stimulus to the area in terms of activities that would normally be drawn away from downtown. I believe the casino could act the same way. It all depends on how it is handled. I believe the casino could be a major advantage to downtown Toronto in that our downtown area now has more activity and more going on than almost any other downtown I can think of. All of it would generate considerable activity and nightlife and generally makes the downtown more livable and safe. Putting the casino in the suburbs only draws the people away from downtown and does nothing to benefit the city (other than the revenues of course). If you're going to have a casino in Toronto - downtown is by far the best place to put it as it would add to the growing list of amenities in our great city. Don't stop the casino, just make sure the design Is a substantial benefit to the city - then w win both ways.

As For problem gamblers, I don't think you can argue that putting a casino in Toronto will make their situation worse. As it is right now there is probably half a dozen casinos within an hours drive of Toronto that they can and will go to. The benefits of the casino far away any of the supposed problems.

 

[Automation Gallery]

e Don't stop the casino, just make sure the design Is a substantial benefit to the city - then we win both ways.

I agree, also make sure the city of Toronto gets the annual millions of infrastructure dollars that comes with setting up shop in this town.
Hey we are in the drivers seat, why not take advantage of it.

 

[gristle]

a lot of these arguments smell like propoganda. they say the casino will suck the life out of downtown, and yet montreal has one and it's still a lively place. Also Montreal is the number one convention destination in north america, and it might be partially due to their casino! they say it will only be locals who go and they will spend all their money there instead of in the local economy...

A couple of things, Montreal isn't the top convention destination in North America. Also, the Montreal casino isn't smack in the middle of downtown. It's not even on the island of Montreal, but on Ile Notre Dame. It's also surrounded by a racing track. In other words, it's off by itself - where a Toronto casino would be if parked at Woodbine.

 

[gristle]

I agree, also make sure the city of Toronto gets the annual millions of infrastructure dollars that comes with setting up shop in this town.
Hey we are in the drivers seat, why not take advantage of it.

First, the city wouldn't be in the driver's seat, the province would. Second, if they casino produces less profits, that much less for the province and even less for the city. The casino takes the lion share of the cash because it's their investment.

It's not like Toronto is going to get some motherload cash infusion from this. The city would be down the line.

 

[rpeters]

Sry you guys are right I made a mistake. Montreal is the #1 international event destination on the continent, Las Vegas gets the most conventions. But seeing how Las Vegas is based around casinos and gets all those conventions it would be likely that a casino here would bring in more conventions.