I think you're probably right. I didn't look at Wynn before I commented, and it appears to be a pullback across the sector. S.
This week, Sheldon Adelson has formalized his intent to be a front man in the war on Online Gambling.
I think that today's downdraft in the stock was related to that.
There is an insinuation in his stance that his oppostion to online gaming will also put LVS behind the curve in terms of adopting online gaming capabilities, and put LVS at a disadvantage in that segment of the industry.
For the most part, I agree with Adelson... somewhat from the aspect of the need to control access by children, but even more from the aspect of controlling access by those who are spending money they've received via public assistance, which is, in essence, other people's money that was meant for sustenance, and not as risk capital.
Singapore is a model society in that regard, and strictly bars entry to casinos by anyone who is on public assistance or who is deeply in default on debt.
While I think it would be excessive to bar entry to those gambling public assistance funds, I do think that the easy accessability of online gaming to those on assistance would be quite irresistable, and would frequently impoverish those who would otherwise live better without that acdess.
About on, or slightly ahead of target from the last channel check posted.
I think Sand's market share will benefit by "average", non-holiday months as I believe that their large hotel inventory "in" their gaming facilities is an advantage in such months.
Non-holiday months also benefit resorts with the best "expo" facilities.
For that reason, I think Sands will exceed the 20%, october share, luck not-withstanding.
Actually, my inclination now is to not be chasing anything.
Although I think the bull market remains intact from a macro perspective, we could see a correction short term. My favorite market model (Hays) is flashing a short-term caution with it's psych index, so I'm holding some cash that I hope to deploy following a pullback.
Seeing more reports of Obamacare "navigators" encouraging those who are trying to maximize their "Subsidy" with ObamaCare to minimize their reported earned-income...
... and claim they don't smoke, when in fact, they do.
Separately, Labor Unions are lobbying to be exempted from being forced to comply with Obamacare.
Reports are that if Big Labor is exempted, it will raise the "risk pool" and generate another surge in premiums next year for hard-working, Middle Class Americans who are not part of an Obama-favored, exempted group (eg: YOU).
Saw an article today saying that Colleges and Universities that have traditionally provided students with low cost coverage are cancelling their health insurance programs.
In general, the cost for Students was reported to be surging by 400% to as much as 1,500%...
... and forcing them to obtain coverage that is far more than they need or want.
Last year, Dr. Laffer of the University of Southern California Economics Dept. did a study.
He took a Single, mother of 2 children in New Jersey with no job, and added up the Social Welfare Benefits that she qualified for. The sum total was about $46,000 per year in benefits.
He then determined that if she got a job and started making money, that for every $1.00 that she earned, on average, she would lose about 80 cents of benefits.
She was, in effect, in an 80% marginal tax bracket. She would be INSANE to go out and get a job. If she worked at all, there would be a POWERFUL incentive to work "under the table", and contribute zero dollars to America's tax base.
Our New Jersey Mother can now get an Obamacare "Platinum" policy for less than $50 a month... whereas your average middle-class breadwinner working 2 jobs would be paying 10 TIMES that much for an inferior "bronze" Obamacare policy.
What does this mean for Dr. Laffer's analogy above? It means she would be even CRAZIER to go out and get a legitimate jobs, because when you factor in the Obamacare subsidy she would lose by making money at a job, she would then be losing over 90 CENTS in benefits for every $1.00 she earned working.
Hope this helps... we're Greece people, we just havn't hit the wall yet.
Appeared to mirror the market. I would postulate that it's normal beta.
Same with SCHYY... mostly mirrored the huge surge in the Hang Seng Index.
No reaction in US markets to the surge in Hong Kong's Hang Seng Index, or China's Shanghai Index.
The moves in Sands China Ltd. and LVS appeared to be pretty much aligned with normal beta.
... then it will lower the number of "payors" into the system while the number of "takers" remains the same...
... and jack up the premiums on the REST of us Middle Class Taxapayers even HIGHER.
... they don't want Obamacare any more than ANY Middle Class American does.
Because Big Labor helped Obama get elected, it's starting to look like they'll get "special treatment"... eg: an exemption from the horrors of Obamacare's sky-rocketing premiums.
The rest of you Middle Class Taxpayers will just have to do what Obamacare's "navigators" are telling people to do...
... lie about your income and smoking habits and snag a big, fat, government subsidy!
Oh, if our Grandparents can see America now! Greece in the Making.
Actually, I saw a channel check come out today for MTD November for the SAR.
They were showing a 20% YOY gain in GGR for macau so far.
Again, I'm willing to bet that Sands is doing better than the 20% share they got in Oct. for the reasons I've stated... but no mention of that in the Channel check.
Good news, given that early estimates were in the 17 to 18% range.
As I've postulated elsewhere, I believe the weaker months (eg: not holiday months) will play better to Sand's market share, because I think the hotel vacancies that are most likely during weaker months will mostly be downtown, non-gaming hotels...
... and NOT Cotai Strip hotel rooms.
For that reason, I don't anticipate Sand's market share to outperform when throngs arrive in macau during holidays and grab the only hotel accomodation available... downtown within blocks of non-Sands resorts.
But people coming during less busy periods will certainly be inclined to "stay where they play", and keep occupancies "consistently" higher on the Cotai Strip.
I'm betting that November is one of those months.
Last night's surge in Hong Kong's Hang Seng stock index was huge... a 2.7% jump, and it pulled Sands China right along with it.
Even though LVS owns more than 70% of Sands China, Sands China stock has now opened a decent sized gap between it and LVS.
Channel checks show Macau gaming up over 20% above last november thus far, but I think SCL's strength is beta, not alpha driven.