House Subcommittee Hearings

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

A department store is doing steady business. They have the ups and downs like other businesses but they are established and have a loyal customer base.

Would you call an industry who needs slots to save it a "steady business?"

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Would you call an industry who needs slots to save it a "steady business?"

Check handle trends the last 10 years. They look pretty steady to me.

Slots are competition that has huge tax advantages that are relatively recent additions to the gambling landscape. Racing was doing fine even as it's taxes were increased because of the lack of competition. When casino's started to spread throughout the country racing was at a big disadvantage because it was already heavily taxed and regulated. The only gambling game in town now had a competitor that had huge built in advantages and racing's hands were tied. Racing's problem is that were slow to adopt slots and casinos to add to their gaming menu. The problem wasnt racing, it was the addition to the market of a competitor with a huge advantage. It is the same reason why Wal Marts eat up other businesses. It isnt necessarily the fault of the other businesses but unless they morph into something other than the same old business model they will disappear. I tend to think of it more in tose terms. You know Mc Donalds sells more than hamburgers now

[alysheba4]

ripping the great jack van berg.......wow

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Check handle trends the last 10 years. They look pretty steady to me.

So the status-quo is okay? Handle remains steady. But the status-quo, like you said, is dangerous...

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

unless they morph into something other than the same old business model they will disappear.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

So the status-quo is okay? Handle remains steady. But the status-quo, like you said, is dangerous...

You are the one who inferred that business wasnt steady. Look past the headlines and examine the actual facts. Wouldnt adding slots be changing the staus quo?

As for the drugs issue, there have been more changes in the last 3 years than the previous 30. If that is not good enough for you...

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are the one who inferred that business wasnt steady. Look past the headlines and examine the actual facts. Wouldnt adding slots be changing the staus quo?

As for the drugs issue, there have been more changes in the last 3 years than the previous 30. If that is not good enough for you...

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, nor what you're trying to defend. First you said the handle is steady, so all is a-okay. And then you said Wal-Mart is driving out other businesses, because they refused to change their business model, which contradicts the steady handle argument (which for the record, handle has dropped by since 2003, and it dropped since last year as well). And again, I'm not simply arguing drugs alone. Drugs are one in a long line of issues.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, nor what you're trying to defend. First you said the handle is steady, so all is a-okay. And then you said Wal-Mart is driving out other businesses, because they refused to change their business model, which contradicts the steady handle argument (which for the record, handle has dropped by since 2003, and it dropped since last year as well). And again, I'm not simply arguing drugs alone. Drugs are one in a long line of issues.

I tried to make an analogy to say what may happen in the big picture yet you want to argue semantics. What i am trying to say is that if we raise takeout to fund this drug war we will wind up losing more customers than we will gain. If we take money out of purses we will lose more owners than we will gain. Either way it is a net loss. I am arguing drugs because that is what was the topic. I didnt hear any talk about other issues today. Hell the drugs are simple compared to simulcasting, host fees, source fees, etc.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I tried to make an analogy to say what may happen in the big picture yet you want to argue semantics. What i am trying to say is that if we raise takeout to fund this drug war we will wind up losing more customers than we will gain. If we take money out of purses we will lose more owners than we will gain. Either way it is a net loss. I am arguing drugs because that is what was the topic. I didnt hear any talk about other issues today. Hell the drugs are simple compared to simulcasting, host fees, source fees, etc.

I don't disagree. The take-out issues etc. all have repercussions, absolutely. But you have to take care of the core business model, because without it, everything else fails. Brushing these issues under the rug because of costs or other hoops, without fully investigating options, is nearsighted, which is all I'm saying.