PHILADELPHIA | The Development Thread VIII

[Insoluble]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Agreed.
Why is that best case scenario? Isn't that borderline worst case scenario? I feel like a few of you didn't bother to read the article describing the venue.

I said mediocre, not bad. I think if done right this has the potential to be an okay development. Just not amazing.

Originally Posted by Londonee

Best case scenario is this thing spills out onto the street, with restaurants, shops, cafes-

I don't think the problem with Market East is a dearth of retail locations. There's plenty of retail along this stretch of Market. Even pedestrian friendly street facing retail on the south side. Adding a few more won't really make a big difference.

I actually find the best part of this proposal to be the fact that they are including a hotel. If that part of the proposal is maintained and doesn't get "phase 2"ed it will probably do a lot more than more the street facing retail. As others have stated though, the whole thing is moot until we find out which casino proposal wins the bid.

[PhiLaw]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

What the developer in sales mode says and what actually happens are, we all know, two entirely different things. Goldenberg or Blatstein will say anything to get the license. Once awarded, reality will dictate. Look at Sugarhouse. Remember those great plans for hotel towers and all that? What do we have now? A slots barn and parking for SSI and welfare recipients seeking a little pseudo glamour.

Welfare and SSI recipients who frequent slots typically can't afford nice restaurants. This is why Steven Starr typically doesn't open restaurants next to lottery kiosks.

Get ready for Center City's first Olde Countrie Buffet. Maybe we get Shoney's too, and a Bob Evan's and a Steak and Ale. Maybe the glamorous Turf Club relocates. Or a branch of the church soup kitchen operation from Logan Square.

At best, this will be the Franklin Mills Food Court at Market East. That is the likely outcome. The Franklin Mills food court with several vacancies.

A casino at Market East will be very depressing, worse than what's there already.

Crow, can you cite any study which supports your claims that Casinos are rife with SSI and Welfare recipients? If not, I'd advise you that it is tough to judge who is on welfare and other government social programs from just looks, clothing and accent alone.

Also, I don't think you have the credentials to be the arbiter if what is a good or bad restaurant/retail shop. I believe the only arbiter is effectual demand. As much as it doesn't comport with you or my sensibilities, if adding the highest value to a parcel near Market East would be to fulfill demand for a Shoney's/Denny's and the like, who is one person to override the collective opinions of thousands of customers? The fact is that there is more value, with demand behind it, for modern urban retail. This is because there is a demand for it, not because some omniscient and lofty-minded central planner personally believes it should be located there.

I abhor the ghetto retail at Market East because it does not result from natural demand (reflecting demographics, socio-economics, tourists, etc.): it results from red tape and other costs imposed upon willing and able developers. Demand for better retail and restaurants is already there, but building has been precluded by a whole host of artificial factors (input costs, red tape, tax structure, etc.)

As an aside, can anyone tell me the difference between a "wetland" and a "swamp?" I bet not.

[el don]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

Crow, can you cite any study which supports your claims that Casinos are rife with SSI and Welfare recipients? If not, I'd advise you that it is tough to judge who is on welfare and other government social programs from just looks, clothing and accent alone.

Also, I don't think you have the credentials to be the arbiter if what is a good or bad restaurant/retail shop. I believe the only arbiter is effectual demand. As much as it doesn't comport with you or my sensibilities, if adding the highest value to a parcel near Market East would be to fulfill demand for a Shoney's/Denny's and the like, who is one person to override the collective opinions of thousands of customers? The fact is that there is more value, with demand behind it, for modern urban retail. This is because there is a demand for it, not because some omniscient and lofty-minded central planner personally believes it should be located there.

I abhor the ghetto retail at Market East because it does not result from natural demand (reflecting demographics, socio-economics, tourists, etc.): it results from red tape and other costs imposed upon willing and able developers. Demand for better retail and restaurants is already there, but building has been precluded by a whole host of artificial factors (input costs, red tape, tax structure, etc.)

As an aside, can anyone tell me the difference between a "wetland" and a "swamp?" I bet not.

A swamp is a wetland dominated by woody plants, such as trees.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

Crow, can you cite any study which supports your claims that Casinos are rife with SSI and Welfare recipients? If not, I'd advise you that it is tough to judge who is on welfare and other government social programs from just looks, clothing and accent alone.

You are right: my claims are based on visual inspection of slots places I have seen. Whether or not the people are on welfare or SSI, these are not the kind of people you want concentrated in a single location in the center of your city if you seek to create a positive impression. They are about as glamorous a bunch as the typical guests and audience of the Jerry Springer Show or the cast of Jersey Shore.

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

Also, I don't think you have the credentials to be the arbiter if what is a good or bad restaurant/retail shop. I believe the only arbiter is effectual demand. As much as it doesn't comport with you or my sensibilities, if adding the highest value to a parcel near Market East would be to fulfill demand for a Shoney's/Denny's and the like, who is one person to override the collective opinions of thousands of customers?

True, I suppose, to an extent. But right now the effectual demand for Olde Countrie Buffet and Steak and Ale is not down there at 8th and Market, and likely won't be there ever unless a slots barn is built. My hope is the powers that be have the foresight to make sure the conditions are not created in Center City in which such effectual demand arises, because where such effectual demands arise, aesthetic oblivion soon follows. Planned aesthetic oblivion is fine along Route 70 or by the stadiums or in Deptford, but not in Center City.

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

I abhor the ghetto retail at Market East because it does not result from natural demand (reflecting demographics, socio-economics, tourists, etc.): it results from red tape and other costs imposed upon willing and able developers. Demand for better retail and restaurants is already there, but building has been precluded by a whole host of artificial factors (input costs, red tape, tax structure, etc.)

Only vaguely true. Over priced union-imposed construction costs, red tape, and tax structure retard decent development throughout the city as a whole, but not Market East in particular. Plenty of good retail and restaurants have been developed throughout Center City and University City in spite of identical obstacles. Market East remains underdeveloped (compared, say, to Walnut Street) because of market factors - the effectual demand is too low there to warrant development of the retail type you don't abhor. But that retail type is there on Walnut Street. The same factors exist at both locations.

So, still, either you do or don't "believe the only arbiter is effectual demand. As much as it doesn't comport with your or my sensibilities, if adding the highest value to a parcel near Market East would be to fulfill demand" for, say, City Blue, Funk-O-Mart, Valu Plus, BK, House of Beauty, Dollar Tree, and the like.

As you ask, "who is one person to override the collective opinions of thousands of customers?" You abhor "ghetto retail", fine. I'm not a fan of it either. But there is "natural demand" for it, and it happens to exist to a great degree at Market East. There is little difference between your abhorrence for ghetto retail and mine for the schlocky Steak'n'Ale type of retail demand that will likely arise in connection with a slots barn.

We are both snobs, it seems. You don't like City Blue, I don't like Shoney's.

The former exists at Market East because of poorly thought out urban development policy. The latter could also exist at Market East because of the next potential phase of poorly thought out urban development policy (permitting the construction of a slots barn).

My point is, let's not compound already poor urban development policy with more worse urban development policy. City Blue is bad enough. Do we need City Blue and Shoney's? I'd say it would be better to promote conditions in which neither is there.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Kidphilly

Just curious why the airport is a factor, this casino will not draw incoming fliers to —

With the right highway and airport access, I'm pretty sure a casino by a major airport would do phenomenally in terms of snagging — addicts on the way to and from travels. Travelers are particularly loose with cash. And given that many of the travelers in question would be from out of state, airport-proximal slots would be an ideal way to boost state coffers with minimal impact on local disposable income. In other words, the net gain to the state is greatest when the most gamblers come from out of state.

Let's face it, from the state's perspective, casinos are a revenue machine. There is no other policy consideration that matters. But if the indirect costs of the casino negatively affect other aspects of the state/local economy (e.g., cause reductions in local purchases of other luxury or leisure items, increases in government supported social costs, etc.), then those costs must be deducted from the direct revenue gains made by the state.

Ideally (cynically), the state wants to internalize the gains and externalize the pain (I'm putting my Jesse Jackson mojo on with that catchy phrase). An airport slots barn would be a very effective way of achieving this.

I'm not saying I agree with the philosophy - my personal opinion is that the government should not be in the business of promoting destructive addictions of any type even when doing so purportedly gains the state revenue - but if you like the idea of slots barns, understand that this is the cynical philosophy that underlies the state's involvement with them: fleece as many people as possible, especially those from outside your jurisdiction. internalize as much revenue gain as possible, externalize as much economic cost as possible. What better place to do this than an airport?

[Larry King]

Chester casino is very close to airport

Philly live casino sounds lame

I say Wynn or 8th and market

Blatsteins proposal isn't the worst in the world but I prefer that area to stay a bit classier

[Kidphilly]

well sort of on the — topic

Sounds like the end is near for Revel in AC

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/201...ino_hires_bank.html#incart_river_default

[Nightman]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Chester casino is very close to airport

Philly live casino sounds lame

I say Wynn or 8th and market

Blatsteins proposal isn't the worst in the world but I prefer that area to stay a bit classier

If I had a vote I would say Wynn first, then Blatstein, then 8th and Market. I wouldn't be terribly disappointed if any of these win. I just question Wynn's location, very much isolated from the city but most would like it that way. I would however be extremely pissed if one of the stadium proposals wins. Those three are awful. Plus these stadium ones are are planned in phases and we know how phases turned out for sugarhouse. That place is two or 3 years old now and we still have an "interim" casino per their plans.

[Capsule F]

I am kind of feeling the 8th and Market casino tbh. I am down with that location, their presentation was pretty robust. Second would probably be Wynn, followed by Bart. I may want Wynn to win primarily because it will put pressure on that — hole Sugarhouse to not be a total — hole. That dump deserves to be put out of business for lying to everyone about the scope and breadth of the project.

[McBane]

Of course, I prefer the flashier proposals, notably Wynn, North Broad, and Market East. My optimistic notes from each of the three:

Wynn - When I was reading the article on Philly.com about how Wynn touted his resorts in Macau and Vegas. The cynic that I am, I went online to research his other, less glamorous casinos. To my surprise, I don't see any. He only operates world class casino resorts and has no history of building crappy slots barns in third rate locales. Definitely a plus for me.

Market8 - Dumb name but I think the location works. I really like the design and I like how the parking is underground. Most telling to me was that Jose Garces has signed on to develop a restaurant. Compare that to the SugarHouse where all you can get is chicken fingers and burgers. They'll be fighting an uphill battle against a strong coalition of NIMBY groups. One criticism: I think the project would strongly benefit from a movie theater! I think a lot of people would show up to a movie 30 min early and — a bit - not — gamblers mind you, but casual, "I'm already here, so why not blow $20 on slots" folks.

Providence - I despise the rooftop shopping and if I were a retailer, I'd never sign a lease to be above the street level - this is not Hong Kong. That being said, I trust Blatstein to deliver something truly grand. He's already vested in the neighborhood through existing projects and as a matter of pure selfishness and greed, it would be a horrible business decision to put a cheap slots barn here. On the contrary, it's in his interest to create a destination that will fit into his vision for North Broad. For me, that's an important distinction.

I also found it funny that the Penn National proposal was so brutally honest. They basically said, "Look we're not the flashy expensive proposal making huge promises. We're going to operate a cheap slots barn that will bring in money to the City and State." Unfortunately, this message likely appeals to the evaluators more so than the flash that we here prefer.

[Ritz48]

Originally Posted by McBane

Of course, I prefer the flashier proposals, notably Wynn, North Broad, and Market East. My optimistic notes from each of the three:

Wynn - When I was reading the article on Philly.com about how Wynn touted his resorts in Macau and Vegas. The cynic that I am, I went online to research his other, less glamorous casinos. To my surprise, I don't see any. He only operates world class casino resorts and has no history of building crappy slots barns in third rate locales. Definitely a plus for me.

Market8 - Dumb name but I think the location works. I really like the design and I like how the parking is underground. Most telling to me was that Jose Garces has signed on to develop a restaurant. Compare that to the SugarHouse where all you can get is chicken fingers and burgers. They'll be fighting an uphill battle against a strong coalition of NIMBY groups. One criticism: I think the project would strongly benefit from a movie theater! I think a lot of people would show up to a movie 30 min early and — a bit - not — gamblers mind you, but casual, "I'm already here, so why not blow $20 on slots" folks.

Providence - I despise the rooftop shopping and if I were a retailer, I'd never sign a lease to be above the street level - this is not Hong Kong. That being said, I trust Blatstein to deliver something truly grand. He's already vested in the neighborhood through existing projects and as a matter of pure selfishness and greed, it would be a horrible business decision to put a cheap slots barn here. On the contrary, it's in his interest to create a destination that will fit into his vision for North Broad. For me, that's an important distinction.

I also found it funny that the Penn National proposal was so brutally honest. They basically said, "Look we're not the flashy expensive proposal making huge promises. We're going to operate a cheap slots barn that will bring in money to the City and State." Unfortunately, this message likely appeals to the evaluators more so than the flash that we here prefer.

There is a world apart from a slots barn and a casino that is just another element of the "fun fabric" of a city. I live and work in Center City. Even with Atlantic City an hour away, we travel to Las Vegas 3 times a year to enjoy the entertainment, food and — and shopping. Even in Las Vegas, we rarely eat, see a show and — in the same place on the same evening. — is just another part of the fun. Based on the comments that preceeded, it seems obvious that the exepectation are that only the dregs will be attracted. if done right this needs not be the case. Many time we have considered going to Sugar House and the logistics become an obsticle. Walking a few blocks away, after dinner in Mid Town Village or Washinton Square sounds like a fun night out. I can also see going to a show and then stopping at the casino for a bite or — a little.

Regarding out of towners. When you are on business in a town you are not familiar, craps and blackjack is a fun way on your own to kill a boring hour or 2.

[CoolZanna]

From an opportunity cost perspective, I think Steve Wynn's proposal takes the cake. No one else is going to spend $900 million on those seventy acres in the foreseeable future. It could also have the added benefit of making SugarHouse up its game. The developer of the Market East lot has said that he has had other opportunities for that space, yet has been waiting to pitch it as a casino. So even if he loses the bid, I think it's likely that something gets built there sooner than anticipated. Furthermore, the "Market8" name is cheesy and indicative of a low-concept plan. Considering the investments about to go into the Gallery and the Girard block proposals, future proposals may even be better than a 5 stores. The sports complex/South Philly proposals are interesting, but I think those areas will start to attract investment sooner rather than latter, too. I admire the scale of Blatstein's vision, but am not convinced it would benefit, rather than hinder North Broad's development in the long-run. Have you ever heard someone say they're moving to an area because there's a casino down the block?

[summersm343]

Sorry guys, I've been extremely busy lately.

So Comcast will officially be the sole owner of NBC after paying GE $16.7 Billion for the remainder in shares of the company.

Rumors are already cropping up in the Real Estate world of NBC jobs being moved to Philadelphia.

[acenturi]

Originally Posted by CoolZanna

From an opportunity cost perspective, I think Steve Wynn's proposal takes the cake. No one else is going to spend $900 million on those seventy acres in the foreseeable future..........

I agree and versed this opinion on the Casino bit early on. I strongly feel that Wynn is the only bidder who can guarantee to deliver exactly what he promised. Further, another advantage is that the Philly Wynn Hotel/Casino Resort will be advertised globally and continuously as a "destination" - for FREE.

Originally Posted by summersm343

Sorry guys, I've been extremely busy lately.

So Comcast will officially be the sole owner of NBC after paying GE $16.7 Billion for the remainder in shares of the company.

Rumors are already cropping up in the Real Estate world of NBC jobs being moved to Philadelphia.

IMO, the best scenario (for Philly) is for Comcast to jump into a "let's move Philly up a notch and transfer significant numbers of California and NYC personnel to Philly". Then in the cases (probably a significant number ) where existing employees refuse to move, it would open up the high paying local job market for their replacements - and maybe a new iconic skyscraper. Too bad I'm not Brian Roberts.

[Philly Fan]

Any word on whether 30 Rock will become the Comcast Building? (I know: not technically Philly development ).

[McBane]

Originally Posted by CoolZanna

I admire the scale of Blatstein's vision, but am not convinced it would benefit, rather than hinder North Broad's development in the long-run. Have you ever heard someone say they're moving to an area because there's a casino down the block?

As I said, Blatstein has hundreds of millions of dollars already invested in North Broad. Why would he, of all people, propose something that would have the slightest negative impact on the area? That's like if Brandywine decide to put a — on the ground floor of the Grove. I'm not favoring Blatstein over Wynn or Market8 at this point; but I am saying that this distinction should be recognized.

Now if Blatstein were to suddenly sell his interests in the neighborhood then I'd be very cautious. But as of now, with the amount of money he has vested in North Broad, it would be the most idiotic business decision if he won the license and gave us a dumbed down slots barn.

[alasi]

The Wynn and Blatstein proposals are the only ones I like. However, Wynn probably has the best chance and is a proven developer of the casino/resort concept. Blatstein's proposal is interesting, but I don't understand why he couldn't design something that stylistically intergrates the inky tower with the new development.

[PhiLaw]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Sorry guys, I've been extremely busy lately.

So Comcast will officially be the sole owner of NBC after paying GE $16.7 Billion for the remainder in shares of the company.

Rumors are already cropping up in the Real Estate world of NBC jobs being moved to Philadelphia.

According to a source (at PwC), the short-term job gains will not be huge, but noticeable. Mostly internal auditors, accountants and attorneys will be moved to Philly. Long term, these decisions have not yet been made. Here's to hoping we get a HUGE influx of jobs!

Sorry I cannot name the source.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

According to a source (at PwC), the short-term job gains will not be huge, but noticeable. Mostly internal auditors, accountants and attorneys will be moved to Philly. Long term, these decisions have not yet been made. Here's to hoping we get a HUGE influx of jobs!

Sorry I cannot name the source.

Yes. Exactly. No T.V. shows will be relocated here... they will all stay in NYC... but there is a huge possibility that new shows will be created and shot in Philadelphia. All jobs that will be relocated here will be back office jobs.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Philly Fan

Any word on whether 30 Rock will become the Comcast Building? (I know: not technically Philly development ).

Don't know. Definitely heard that they will put a Comcast logo at the top. Not sure if they are following through with that though.