For the last five years at least, the theme of the future of gaming concessions in Macau has been on the media agenda – and journalists will do anything to tease out the news.
In fact, industry analysts, commentators and politicians regularly pronounce upon this subject.
Everyone, that is, except the government and the (3+3) contenders themselves.
At first glance, they seem to be the least worried.
Weird?
Only apparently.
Everyone has the notion that the more time passes the better for the status quo – it is as if few believe in radical change from 2022 on, and even less as the pages of the calendar get torn off. After all, stability and harmony are virtually a mantra chanted by the local rulers.
Operators will continue to announce huge investments. Las Vegas Sands, for example, will spend $1.1 billion in transforming Sands Cotai Central into a London-themed resort, while others still have great works to inaugurate (SJM).
More extraordinary still, the announcement made a few weeks ago by Steve Wynn to expand its newest property on COTAI: “We have been encouraged by the government in conversations with them to file our plans for Phase 2 [to be developed on 4.45 hectares], which we’re working on now.”
That is, they are talking little, but working away like beavers. And they probably talk outside of Macau . . .
It is known that some players consider that it is more important to get into the good graces of the Mainland than those who govern the city. And it is known today that in 2001 there was some kind of negotiation between some competitors for gaming licences in Macau and top politicians in Beijing.
Coincidence or not, MNA recently reported that Steve Wynn had travelled to Macau via Beijing.
A few months before it had also been in the news that the same Wynn had hand-delivered a letter – penned by the Chinese Government – to U.S. President Donald Trump, urging him to return Guo Wengui, a Chinese businessman who had fled the country in 2014 and is now seeking asylum in the United States. The news, originally published by The Wall Street Journal, was denied by Wynn Resorts.
“Nobody really knows what’s going to happen”
But the appearance of various items of information involving Beijing and Steve Wynn cannot but be associated with the fact that this entrepreneur has taken the hardest criticism of the local government in these almost 20 years of gaming investment in Macau.
In 2015, he complained that the “frustrating tone around the regulatory environment in Macau was the most notable point of the quarter,” lamenting the government cap on Macau casino gaming tables as “irrational.”
“Here in America we would never have a Las Vegas of the diversity we’ve had if the city had told us how many tables we could spread,” Wynn also said in 2015. “The table cap is the single most counterintuitive and irrational decision that was ever made.”
Let’s be clear: Steve Wynn was not the only one to criticise government decisions (just think about what Pansy Ho said in 2009, complaining about the lack of land and the fact that Galaxy and Las Vegas Sands together had received more than 70 per cent of the land awarded to the gaming sector) but no-one was as vociferous as he.
Still, there are exceptions.
It is normal, of course, for the top concessionaires to want to nurture a great rapport and understanding with the MSAR Government, as recently expressed, for example, in the words of Wilfred Wong (of LVS): “Sands China is so grateful to the Macau Government, to the local community and to our We are pleased to welcome you to Macau as a member of the Macao Special Administrative Region of Macau. the Macau government to further support Macau’s transformation into a world Centre of Tourism and Leisure. “
In short, the six operators seem calm and quiet. Even when there are indications that “a promising positive 2018 in the Macau SAR may face risks derived from the end of some of the concessions to casino operators and the links of organised crime with the gaming sector,” stated a research paper by business advising company Steve Vickers Associates, read by our sister publication MNA.
But silence – and above all, tranquillity – are golden, it seems.
Not many months ago, Reuters wrote a story about how ‘Macau land row rattles casino bosses ahead of 2020 licence talks’, and how all the senior casino executives interviewed “requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue.”
One of them went as far as to declare: “Nobody really knows what’s going to happen,” while another added: “Just because you have the licence now doesn’t mean you will have one in the future. They are setting our expectations that some operators may not continue.”
“We have been given reason to have confidence that our businesses will continue after the initial concession expiration dates. That confidence is based upon the kind of conversations we have had with the government.”
Who said that? Steve Wynn. When? Some weeks ago [… before resigning as Chairman and Chief Executive of Wynn Resorts and Wynn Macau in response to allegations of sexual misconduct].
A Strange Timetable | Extension vs. Expiration
