Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

International Game Technology PLC Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • vonaboy vonaboy Aug 28, 2004 1:26 PM Flag

    CA casino

    excellent post. You obviously are on top of this situation. What is up w/ the bill in Calif to allow slots at tracks. If I understand that correctly if it is passed the Indians will not give the money they said they would???what in your opinion would be best for IGT? also what is your opinion on the performance of this stock?..Thanks

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • The Casinos in San Pablo are off the burner..do not look for this to happen within the next few years..They do not want to place Casinos within a large city... Other wise IGT is recommended by a few people...The San Pablo Casino wants a 30 mile radious from which no one else can build Casinos but the problem is that there are other Indian Tribes within this area....NO Casinos in San Pablo.....

      • 1 Reply to nevgreco
      • >>>>>>NO Casinos in San Pablo.....<<<<<<

        You're wrong my friend. As I indicated in a recent post, the law requires that the State negotiate, in good faith, a compact with a federally recognized tribe. The Lyttons will get a casino compact even if a federal judge has to write the provisions of it. They should have a compact by the early months of next year--construction should take around two years or so. I expect to be there to play some Megabucks on opening day. Megabucks has made me lots of money over the years so this is my chance to return a token amount back.

    • >>>>>>excellent post. You obviously are on top of this situation. What is up w/ the bill in Calif to allow slots at tracks. If I understand that correctly if it is passed the Indians will not give the money they said they would???what in your opinion would be best for IGT? also what is your opinion on the performance of this stock?..Thanks<<<<<<

      You are correct that if Proposition 68, put up by the cardroom and track people who would get the slots, if passed, would allow non-Indian casinos unless EVERY tribal compact included 25% to the State (near-impossible). Prop. 68 would reqire the non-tribal businesses to pay about 1/3 of their revenues for good public purposes like police, fire, education, etc. I think in the long-run, it would be good for IGT since it would open the door to a whole new gaming industry to compete with the Indian casinos. It is kind of sleazy since the specific tracks and cardrooms who would get the slots are specified in the proposition. In my view, the chances of its winning are slim to none, more likely the latter. Arnold has made it clear he will campaign against it.

      Proposition 70, put up by the rich tribes, is just as sleazy as Prop. 68. The tribes would pay only the normal corporate tax of between 8% and 9% to the State (in contrast to the huge tribal casinos in CT that pay 25%). In addition, the 2,000 slot limit per tribe would be lifted and and the tribes could buy all the slots they want with no license payment to the State. This is brazenness of the highest order--not far from just plain stealing. It would be very good for IGT but, in my view, has very little chance of passing with Arnold campaigning against it. I think the tribal proponents are unbelievably stupid. They think the unlimited millions of dollars they will spend will beat Arnold combined with the CA Labor Movement, the Republicans, the Democrats and an exceptionally large number of of civic and business organizations. The Indians easily won the constitutional amendment (Prop. 1-A), that instituted tribal casinos, with lots of good will among Californians, a huge amount of campaign money, and only token opposition from the Nevada casino interests (IGT was part of the opposition in sympathy with their Nevada customers--but in their hearts, I'm quite sure they wanted Prop. 1-A to win). Arnold has lots more public support than the Indians do at this point but the Indians still think they can buy the vote with campaign money. They'll get a bad shock unless they withdraw Prop. 70 from the ballot. I would not be surprised if both 68 and 70 were withdrawn by their proponents before the ballots are printed. In any event, all the possible scenarios would allow IGT to sell lots of slots in CA. Prop 70 probably would allow IGT to get their slot sales most quickly but it's not going to happen. I think we'll end up with Arnold signing compacts with the individual tribes as he is trying to do right now. The doomed propositions may delay the process a bit.

      My opinion??? IGT is down almost 39% from its all-time high in April. There has been NO bad news at all that pertains to the long-term future of this great company. I consider this a buying opportunity for the long-term investor with a horizon of at least ten years. Half my portfolio is in IGT or I would be buying now--I may still. You never know the absolute bottom but if you buy it now, I am confident you will be very happy with it in ten years. If you want to see the thinking behind my views, go here:
      http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&board=7082572&tid=igt&sid=7082572&a
      ction=m&mid=5394

 
IGT
13.04-0.16(-1.21%)Feb 9 4:01 PMEST