Well proof that their success is because of the reasons that you are claiming.

You really can't prove it irrefutably. Can you speculate as other reasons? Perhaps Im wrong.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/CityCe....html?x=0&.v=5

Bottom of the article.

Yes- 75% means they are in the black operationally, obviously they have to have some pretty robust years to recoup the cost of the project.

Yeah that just means they arent losing money on the operation of the hotel though. The residential side has to be a bloodbath and the debt service on the $8 billion dollars it cost to build it has to be massive.

I have no idea if you are right or wrong or the reasoning behind it. I was just wondering where you got your info.

With slots bill pending, Arlington looks ahead

"Gaming itself can be successful" said Arnold, "but if we want to truly make it maximally effective competing in the marketplace, I think we're going to need a couple other components. We've been updating studies that have already been done, and they're indicating that we need to consider having some additional upscale food and beverage opportunities in addition to the traditional casino buffet. Also, we'd be considering selective retail, as well as an entertainment venue."

http://www.drf.com/news/article/112854.html

New Fans yes, but what about us?
 

Steve and the rest of the D.T. family, I recently join this forum because I love talking about horseracing. But I wanted to add a comment that I wanted to make yesterday during the show (May 11th) about drawing new fans.

I understand the people like my late grandfather was the person who got me into enjoying horseracing. Born in Baltimore, I had the pleasure of going to Old Hilltop, Bowie, Laurel and for night racing to the bull ring at Charlestown. Yes it was the crowds of old men smoking and cussing on the rail even in my early teens before I was allowed to wager, I loved watching the horses and even handicapping races for my grandfather. I had the pleasure to see all three triple crown winners in the 70's win the Preakness live in person. And yes I was one of them fools running up against the inner rail from the infield to cheer as Secretariat pulled away from Sham.

But the real point I want to make; us current horseplayers are taken for granted, if the industry wants new fans they need to clean up the mess with medication and for the most part shorten race meets. You take 60 % of the tracks who runs meets for 6 months or more (Calder, Thistledowns, Woodbine and others) it's mainly the same horses beating up on each other. And with simulcasting, more focus is put on multiple tracks instead of the industry combining some of the lesser tracks to develop things like a super condense meeting. Going to the track years ago was an event. Today when you see some of the tracks on your simulcast feed you can barely hear anyone at the track and when they show the crowd you may see a handful of people watching races unless it's a big event.

I understand the investors who buys the horse is key and maybe the tax breaks that were taken away in the 80's should be reinstated. And if you want the younger crowds fine! But let's remember the easiest way to attract people is; give them an opportunity to have fun but in the words of one of most favorite movie of all time " let it ride"....there's no racing without betting!

People don't want a race card filled with chalk, or given waterdown beer for $1 and a hotdog that taste like it's been in water for 10 days straight. Gulfstream did it right, they combined the race track in the daytime with dinner and clubs at night time. Even in the off season they are still able to get a crowd. Yes they are adding high in shops like most gambling places.

I hate to say it, but maybe NBC was on the right target. For most men like myself we would go to the live meet if I knew plenty of ladies was there having a good time and looking great....shhhh don't tell my wife though lol