To hear the administrators of HPR, the entity is reeling under a crushing load of license fees and taxation, equal to 50% of the revenues generated by the business.
The 250 million dollars is twice that of their competition and "the highest in the country", according to a spokesperson for Hoosier Park. Because of this they are weighing their options and considering bankruptcy among them. . .
Now, they generated 500 million in revenue, are paying up 1/2 that in fees. . . that still leaves 250 million. . . Wonder how much is enough????
It does strike me as a bit overwhelming to subject them to a 50% rate though, and more than unfair. . . For that kind of money they should be able to utilize live dealers, and initiate whatever games they would like. . .
The place is typically jumping, and I go past there a lot. I've rarely seen the parking lots empty and you usually have to search for an open machine. . .
Seriously, how can you not make money in that business? Don't the slots just route the money through the floor into a large room in the basement where there are guys with brooms sweeping it all up into garbage bags?
Quote from: Exterminator on June 16, 2009, 01:04:57 PM
Seriously, how can you not make money in that business? Don't the slots just route the money through the floor into a large room in the basement where there are guys with brooms sweeping it all up into garbage bags?
That's what happens when you take organized crime out of the day-to-day gambling business operations and replace them with degreed business-people! :biggrin:
Seriously though, I find it pretty hard to believe they are hurting to the degree they seem to want us to believe. Yes, the effective tax-rate is overkill. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on June 16, 2009, 01:36:01 PM
That's what happens when you take organized crime out of the day-to-day gambling business operations and replace them with degreed business-people! :biggrin:
Seriously though, I find it pretty hard to believe they are hurting to the degree they seem to want us to believe. Yes, the effective tax-rate is overkill. . .
maybe they are getting ready to ask the Gov to bail them out....then they got the banks, the auto industry and now the gambling industry....they can hire a slots czar to oversee it.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 16, 2009, 01:40:14 PM
maybe they are getting ready to ask the Gov to bail them out....then they got the banks, the auto industry and now the gambling industry....they can hire a slots czar to oversee it.
As a matter of fact that is kind of what the article I read states; except they are looking for a tax break and concessions from the boys and girls at the hog trough; congress. . .
It is kind of unfair that one of their competitors is launching a multi-million dollar river boat as long as two football fields with full gambling, just the other side of the state, and their tax rates aren't even close to what HP is paying. . .
The rate is what they agreed to in order to be allowed to open the facility and now this is nothing more than a ploy to try to get the rules changed so they can pocket more of the money. I say let them go bankrupt and if they're unwilling to pay what they agreed, let them close up shop.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 16, 2009, 04:32:49 PM
The rate is what they agreed to in order to be allowed to open the facility and now this is nothing more than a ploy to try to get the rules changed so they can pocket more of the money. I say let them go bankrupt and if they're unwilling to pay what they agreed, let them close up shop.
WOW!!...but I agree with you ex.....I say it IS a bluff...and they should be called out on it.
There are several business men, with much power to answer too, if this thing was to go under.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 16, 2009, 04:32:49 PM
The rate is what they agreed to in order to be allowed to open the facility and now this is nothing more than a ploy to try to get the rules changed so they can pocket more of the money. I say let them go bankrupt and if they're unwilling to pay what they agreed, let them close up shop.
I agree in basis, however given the fact that the rate agreed to is unusually high and far and away much more than their competition within the state, not to mention the nation, doesn't it smack of unfairness? I mean, if we (the state) want to encourage businesses such as this one, to establish themselves within economically depressed areas in order to stimulate growth and job opportunities, isn't the agreement entered into doing just the opposite? (Or is it governmental unjustified profits)
On the other hand, the ownership is not new to the area, nor the industry, and they should have surmised it was a bad deal up front. . . :-\
I still don't understand how a business generating a quarter of a
Billion in revenue after taxes goes bankrupt though. . .
At some level I suspect a high level of government skullduggery at work here.
EDIT: To correct "million" to "billion" . . .
Quote from: Palehorse on June 16, 2009, 05:26:01 PM
I agree in basis, however given the fact that the rate agreed to is unusually high and far and away much more than their competition within the state, not to mention the nation, doesn't it smack of unfairness?
That's like saying if I agree to a credit card with a 9% APR and you agree to a credit card with a 16% APR, you should be able to come back after you've charged a bunch of stuff on yours and have the rate lowered because it isn't fair. They knew what the rate was going into the venture and agreed to it. The ability of others to negotiate better doesn't change the terms of their deal.
QuoteI still don't understand how a business generating a quarter of a million in revenue after taxes goes bankrupt though. . .
Exactly.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 17, 2009, 07:59:03 AM
That's like saying if I agree to a credit card with a 9% APR and you agree to a credit card with a 16% APR, you should be able to come back after you've charged a bunch of stuff on yours and have the rate lowered because it isn't fair. They knew what the rate was going into the venture and agreed to it. The ability of others to negotiate better doesn't change the terms of their deal.
. . .
Gambling has been a highly regulated industry for some time; more so than your average credit card industry anyway. The government has insisted upon a strict accounting of every transaction, including in Las Vegas where it traditionally extended the honor system toward gamblers but now no longer does even that.
My concerns over this are that once we overlook even one incident of unreasonable taxation, the government will see opportunities to use the same theory in additional areas of the market place, driving consumer costs through the roof. . . or something along those lines.
Lately, local and state government seem as bad as a child; give them an inch and they'll take a mile. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on June 16, 2009, 05:26:01 PM
I still don't understand how a business generating a quarter of a million in revenue after taxes goes bankrupt though. . .
Like the old man used to say, "Figures don't lie, but liars can figure."
Quote from: Palehorse on June 16, 2009, 12:15:29 PM
Now, they generated 500 million in revenue, are paying up 1/2 that in fees. . . that still leaves 250 million. . . Wonder how much is enough????
Quote from: Palehorse on June 16, 2009, 05:26:01 PM
I still don't understand how a business generating a quarter of a million in revenue after taxes goes bankrupt though. . .
Is there some kind of new math I'm not aware of that turns 250,000,000 into 250,000?
Quote from: Exterminator on June 17, 2009, 07:59:03 AM
Exactly.
And you agreed in the context of the article without catching that?
Quote from: pariann on June 17, 2009, 10:20:55 AM
Is there some kind of new math I'm not aware of that turns 250,000,000 into 250,000?
quote author=Exterminator link=topic=14524.msg320052#msg320052 date=1245239943]
And you agreed in the context of the article without catching that?
That's like saying if I agree to a credit card with a 9% APR and you agree to a credit card with a 16% APR, you should be able to come back after you've charged a bunch of stuff on yours and have the rate lowered because it isn't fair. They knew what the rate was going into the venture and agreed to it. The ability of others to negotiate better doesn't change the terms of their deal.
Exactly.
Huh??
Quote from: Palehorse on June 16, 2009, 12:15:29 PM
To hear the administrators of HPR, the entity is reeling under a crushing load of license fees and taxation, equal to 50% of the revenues generated by the business.
The 250 million dollars is twice that of their competition and "the highest in the country", according to a spokesperson for Hoosier Park. Because of this they are weighing their options and considering bankruptcy among them. . .
Now, they generated 500 million in revenue, are paying up 1/2 that in fees. . . that still leaves 250 million. . . Wonder how much is enough????
It does strike me as a bit overwhelming to subject them to a 50% rate though, and more than unfair. . . For that kind of money they should be able to utilize live dealers, and initiate whatever games they would like. . .
The place is typically jumping, and I go past there a lot. I've rarely seen the parking lots empty and you usually have to search for an open machine. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on June 17, 2009, 10:23:07 AM
Huh??
Oh that's funny, my sister called me in the middle of writing that, so the editing got screwed up. I fixed it.
since when is 250,000,000 that Hoosier Park isn't paying out in taxes...a quarter of a million?
Quote from: pariann on June 17, 2009, 01:30:03 PM
Oh that's funny, my sister called me in the middle of writing that, so the editing got screwed up. I fixed it.
since when is 250,000,000 that Hoosier Park isn't paying out in taxes...a quarter of a million?
Thank you for pointing out my typo. You will be happy to note that it has now been corrected, so you may rest easy knowing all is right within the world as you know it.
Moving forward I will no longer be depending just upon the spell check feature of this forum to help me assure accurate spelling and grammar, but also utilizing a comprehensive editing staff to review each of my posts before they are placed onto the forum.
While this may result in an initial increase in delay time as it relates to the accustomed reply rates you may have enjoyed to this point, I expect that over time you should see these return to current rates within a short validation period of time.
Again, thank you for pointing out the error and I apologize for any emotional distress, discomfort, or uneasiness it may have driven. And thank you for reading.
http://www.heraldbulletin.com/local/local_story_168113049.html (http://www.heraldbulletin.com/local/local_story_168113049.html)
Mitch says "No Bailout for Hoosier Park".
Quote from: Palehorse on June 17, 2009, 01:41:46 PM
Thank you for pointing out my typo. You will be happy to note that it has now been corrected, so you may rest easy knowing all is right within the world as you know it.
Moving forward I will no longer be depending just upon the spell check feature of this forum to help me assure accurate spelling and grammar, but also utilizing a comprehensive editing staff to review each of my posts before they are placed onto the forum.
While this may result in an initial increase in delay time as it relates to the accustomed reply rates you may have enjoyed to this point, I expect that over time you should see these return to current rates within a short validation period of time.
Again, thank you for pointing out the error and I apologize for any emotional distress, discomfort, or uneasiness it may have driven. And thank you for reading.
Heck, I just wanted to know if there was ANOTHER phase of New Math in existence. I still haven't figured out what is new about the new math as it is.
Quote from: pariann on June 17, 2009, 06:19:36 PM
Heck, I just wanted to know if there was ANOTHER phase of New Math in existence. I still haven't figured out what is new about the new math as it is.
That would be Anderson math. . . :biggrin:
LOL!!!!!
Quote from: pariann on June 17, 2009, 10:15:15 PM
LOL!!!!!
And that's probably what is at work behind this whole fiasco if the truth were to be revealed. :icon_twisted:
:kickcan:
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090622/LOCAL/906220360/Ind.+casinos+battling+lower+revenue (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090622/LOCAL/906220360/Ind.+casinos+battling+lower+revenue)
The talk continues and now it would seem that Hoosier Park is not alone in paying 250 MILLION in fees and licensing as was previously reported by a local newspaper, but rather it is the same fee all Indiana casino operations pay. And now they are joining the fray with similar "threats" and predictions. . .
The current article states that HP contributes 200k a month to the city of Anderson. . . My question is what is going to happen to the services this monthly fee pays for when they go under??? I speculate even more cut backs in city services. . .
I have ALWAYs been against the track and gambling as a means of supporting government..............it depends upon other peoples misfortunes, to be successful....it is a lose, lose in MOST situations...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 22, 2009, 07:50:19 AM
I have ALWAYs been against the track and gambling as a means of supporting government..............it depends upon other peoples misfortunes, to be successful....it is a lose, lose in MOST situations...
That whole debate is water under the bridge though. They decided and already allowed them. The point to keep in mind now is that should these facilities go under it will result in huge job losses (on top of the already saturated unemployment roles) as well as revenue loss for local, state, and federal governments. Hoosier Park alone employs 1,000 people. Bottom line is that if these entities go under you and I will have to pick up the slack and pay for the services or they too will cease to be provided.
Next year it seems likely that Ohio and Kentucky will both be passing legislation to allow casinos in these states, increasing the competition and further reducing the "draw" of those casinos already in operation. Granted, all of them made money last year, but the losses they experience this year due to the economic downturn may make the difference between staying open or closing unless something is done about the taxes and fees they are paying. . .