PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : LAS VEGAS | Boom Project Rundown! 2.0



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92

MrV
Apr 20, 2007, 9:49 AM
Is it a possibility that MGM first develops the newly bought site and the Circus Circus motel and trailer park (78 acres should be more then enough) and then renovates Circus Circus into a casino that still caters to the mid-end gamblers and tourists, possibly turn it into a non-themed hotel (or less strongly themed), in order to make it look more in place with the rest of the buildings instead of the somewhat cheesy circus theme? Or should mid-end casino's on the strip considered to be something of the past and will they turn it into (another) high-end place?

Now that properties on the north-end of the strip are getting more and more valuable, it amazes me that there aren't any noteworthy hotels/buildings/developments (correct me if I'm wrong) between Wynn and The Riviera. Wouldn't the owners of these properties be much better of (financially) if they sold there (compared with other strip properties) small businesses and pieces of land to a developer?

mdiederi
Apr 20, 2007, 3:31 PM
Now that properties on the north-end of the strip are getting more and more valuable, it amazes me that there aren't any noteworthy hotels/buildings/developments (correct me if I'm wrong) between Wynn and The Riviera. Wouldn't the owners of these properties be much better of (financially) if they sold there (compared with other strip properties) small businesses and pieces of land to a developer?
Yeah, that's where the Conrad-Majestic-Waldorf Astoria (http://vegastodayandtomorrow.com/majestic.htm) thing is supposed to go.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Majestic.jpg

The Riviera and the Frontier are the only two significant properties left that are up for sale on the Strip.

MrV
Apr 20, 2007, 4:47 PM
Yeah, that's where the Conrad-Majestic-Waldorf Astoria (http://vegastodayandtomorrow.com/majestic.htm) thing is supposed to go.

Thanks!
According to Vegas today and Tomorrow, construction is set to begin this month. Is that still going to happen (or has it already happened?), or has the project been put on hold again?

lfc4life
Apr 20, 2007, 6:38 PM
The Conrad was announced more than 3 years and nothing so far has happened. I am interested though to see that Mark over at VT&T has groundbreaking scheduled for April 2007, so maybe??

It looks a beautiful project and would complement the Wynn so well imo but the further down the line we go the less and less likely it seems this wonderful project will happen :(

BrianFey
Apr 20, 2007, 6:53 PM
Yeah, that's where the Conrad-Majestic-Waldorf Astoria (http://vegastodayandtomorrow.com/majestic.htm) thing is supposed to go.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Majestic.jpg

The Riviera and the Frontier are the only two significant properties left that are up for sale on the Strip.

MR.V

I agree with you. W-A is slated to go here, IF it happens. But I was just looking at the satallite image on Google Maps yesterday, and you are right. I was thinking that exact thing. The W-A project, even if it happens, only takes a very small part of that land, and its way north of Encore. There is still a fantastic property full of crap, just north of Encore that now has a few small buildings, etc. That would be perfect, being across from Echelon Place.

drobar
Apr 20, 2007, 8:58 PM
Let's not fool ourselves people. Circus Circus is a joke. If MGM is serious about developing that portion of town, they should erect resorts/buildings that reflect the emerging environment, i.e Sky, Trump, ect... There is no aesthetic/cultural value whatsoever to the Circus Circus in it's present condition. Just the whole concept of "Circus Circus" is atrocious. If they are going to keep Circus Circus, they really need to plan something visually appealing and less garish. Hmmm.....maybe "Cirque Cirque"? :jester:

I hope Circus stays the way it is, enhance it yes, but don't knock it down. MGM are not stupid. Circus pulls in the budget traveller by the truckload and without it and Excalibur that market would be lost for them. At the moment MGM seem to have every aspect of the market covered, high-end, mid-high end as well as the mid and lower ends of the market. perhaps they should buy the Western on Fremont, then they really can say they have everything covered full stop :haha:

Circus also seems to have cleaned itself up a bit compared to when I was there last in June 2005. It actually looked ok and on the clean side ;) when i visited there in February this year.

If MGM are serious about building on that vacant site then that is further fantastic news for the north strip. Personally I hope Sky is the last of the independent condos built directly on the Strip. There is plenty of place for independent condos on paradise, industrial, sahara etc. The strip should be left for the hotels/casinos. Condos on the strip should be part of hotel projects like city center or echelon etc. just my two cents :tup:

lfc4life
Apr 20, 2007, 10:09 PM
drobar; Circus is a total money maker and has been since its inception. There are thousands of people who would disagree with your statement; tacky CC may be, but it still brings in the money by the bucketload. get rid of CC or radically alter it beyond recognition and you lose a huge chuck of the market.

Vegas can only absorb so many high-calibre five star resorts imo, eventually there will be too many. there is no way Vegas can fill 140,000 five stars bedrooms every night assuming all the upcoming hotels are five stars. There needs to budget hotels on the Strip to complement the five stars mega resorts.

mdiederi
Apr 20, 2007, 10:19 PM
They still have another Circus Circus in Reno where all the penny slot players can go.

justdefended
Apr 20, 2007, 11:00 PM
drobar; Circus is a total money maker and has been since its inception. There are thousands of people who would disagree with your statement; tacky CC may be, but it still brings in the money by the bucketload. get rid of CC or radically alter it beyond recognition and you lose a huge chuck of the market.

Vegas can only absorb so many high-calibre five star resorts imo, eventually there will be too many. there is no way Vegas can fill 140,000 five stars bedrooms every night assuming all the upcoming hotels are five stars. There needs to budget hotels on the Strip to complement the five stars mega resorts.

It's true. As old as Circus Circus is it generates steady cash flow from patrons that would play elsewhere if it weren't around. They just need to update the property to current standards. Just because it caters to a lower income doesn't mean it has to look that way. South Point is a great example. Nice looking hotel but local prices and wagering on everything.

Althought at the same time, I wouldn't mind watching that neon clown get blown up.

VegasMatt
Apr 21, 2007, 1:14 AM
I’m not sure why some seem to think MGM cares if there is a pink monstrosity next to their
competitor’s luxury resort. MGM’s Gem is south strip. If I was MGM, I’d build a fifty foot clown
on Circus Circus to steer the higher cliental away from Echelon place towards CityCenter.
Circus Circus is MGM’s Walmart Brand and it’s making lots of money.
I wouldn’t wager money on a classy resort replacing too soon.

Besides, what fun would Vegas be if it lost all its tacky grandeur.


Side Note: The Clown’s giant pink ass would be facing Echelon’s luxury suites

heyyoucharlie
Apr 21, 2007, 1:14 AM
drobar; Circus is a total money maker and has been since its inception. There are thousands of people who would disagree with your statement; tacky CC may be, but it still brings in the money by the bucketload. get rid of CC or radically alter it beyond recognition and you lose a huge chuck of the market.

Vegas can only absorb so many high-calibre five star resorts imo, eventually there will be too many. there is no way Vegas can fill 140,000 five stars bedrooms every night assuming all the upcoming hotels are five stars. There needs to budget hotels on the Strip to complement the five stars mega resorts.


I could not agree more... Circus Circus is hands down a cash cow!!! Walk through there at noon on a Wed...the place is packed:tup:

Where as the Sahara at the same time looks like a ghost town...

I really think all CC needs is just a good paint job.

BruceH
Apr 21, 2007, 4:24 AM
MGM with its new partners could very well take the CC fun to another level on North Strip. Just like in Dubai, consider having an indoor ski slope, a high end zoo, an indoor golf course, botanical gardens and a new Cirque show. It will appeal to a wide cross section of visitors both mid and upper tier. MGM will be challenged to leave CC with just a coat of new paint when surrounded by higher end properties. Even the McDonalds will now be given a luxury look. South Strip will become the more middle tier focus and North Strip will take on a higher level of tourist and resident IMHO.

vegasrain84
Apr 21, 2007, 4:25 AM
I really think all CC needs is just a good paint job.


I really think Circus Circus needs a good implosion job.. Cash cow or not.. It's a hideous Pink Nightmare! MGM should just cut its losses, build a non-themed resort rivaling CityCenter's size, but keep it affordable so that it still appeals to the middle income folks. For that matter, I think they should get rid of Excalibur, and Monte Carlo. Monte Carlo should go because it looks like a prison, and because it would allow for an expansion of CityCenter.. Excalibur because it looks like something out of disney world, only more tacky.. But first and foremost, that Pink Nightmare has got to go..

kenratboy
Apr 21, 2007, 4:48 AM
Just thinking out loud - we are talking about taking multiple properties and condensing/combining them into one massive complex. This allows for one destination to offer more amenities at a larger scale, reducing costs, opening opportunities, and making things better for the customer.

Do you think the future of Vegas will be these massive complexes (as in, NOT a 2000 room luxury resort, but something with 4, 6, 8, 10k rooms, lots of condos, vast shopping and entertainment venues (bigger than before), etc.)?

Its no secret that things have been getting bigger in Vegas, but recently, while a lot of these properties are large, they are not AS large as some of the stuff that came before. Are we seeing things jumping up to the next level of size?

mdiederi
Apr 21, 2007, 5:03 AM
If I was MGM, I’d build a fifty foot clown
on Circus Circus
The obnoxious neon clown out front is already 125 feet tall.

Circus Circus is a nickel and dime cow. Sure, MGM makes a profit off of Circus Circus, because they practically got if for free in the Mandalay Resorts deal. A handful of baccarat tables at Bellagio probably have higher revenue than Circus Circus's entire casino drop. I can't find exact figures on Circus Circus's revenue, anybody have the break down on MGM's properties? Seems MGM's nicer properties get two to three times higher average prices for rooms on normal nights than Circus Circus does on its busiest nights, do the math. Even though Circus Circus shows a profit, I think they are losing money compared to what they could do on that property.

I say build cheap stuff south of the airport and make the entire Strip high class.

MGM with its new partners could very well take the CC fun to another level on North Strip. Just like in Dubai, consider having an indoor ski slope, a high end zoo, an indoor golf course, botanical gardens and a new Cirque show.
Las Vegas Wet (http://www.lasvegaswet.com/) is already planning all that stuff on 200 acres with several themed "Lands (http://www.lasvegaswet.com/members/lands.php)", even indoor snow skiing, SOUTH of the airport on Las Vegas Blvd. The cheap places on the Strip won't be able to compete with some of the theme park stuff that is going to be built to the south. I really think McCarran airport will be the dividing line in the future for Vegas's high budget and low budget visitors. Station Casinos also owns a big chunk of land just south of South Point.

I also heard that the county is seriously considering accelerating development of the Ivanpah airport because McCarran is maxing out much faster than expected. They're almost half way through the Environmental Impact Study already. And of course they are talking of some sort of public transport rail system from Ivanpah International, which will stop at major resorts, obviously hitting the ones south of McCarran first. Las Vegas Blvd already extends all the way to Jean. Also, MGM is developing a major subdivision in Jean.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Ivanpah%20Airport/Ivanpah1.jpg

heyyoucharlie
Apr 21, 2007, 6:19 AM
Going South on I-15 from about St Rose (about the end of town) how far is it to Ivanpah???

mdiederi
Apr 21, 2007, 6:38 AM
From the intersection of Saint Rose Parkway and I-15 it is 14.5 miles to Jean, and from Jean to Primm is 12.7 miles. Ivanpah is the name of the valley south of Jean.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Ivanpah%20Airport/IvanpahMap.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Ivanpah%20Airport/map.jpg

MrV
Apr 21, 2007, 12:03 PM
MR.V

There is still a fantastic property full of crap, just north of Encore that now has a few small buildings, etc. That would be perfect, being across from Echelon Place.

Maybe Wynn can buy these properties in the future for further expansions (after he is done with his golf course redevelopment), since he recently bought some land east of those properties (across the desert inn arterial from his golf course).

I like the idea of expanding Circus Circus with things like an indoor ski slope etc. but I also doubt whether the strip is the right location for such attractions. How is the current adventure dome doing?

BrianFey
Apr 21, 2007, 1:39 PM
I would love to see Wynn buy that, and develop more strip frontage, and save the golf course for later, but I don't think that will happen. I am not sure what land you are refering too that Wynn recently purchased. According to LVT&T they did purchase 2 new properties, one north of his main parcel, and another being the Chamber of Commerce site. But not when you look on the Wynn map on their site, they no longer show the property to the north, across Desert Inn, so I think that was reported in error. I do think they are at least thinking about their next step though, and I know they are always looking for new land that makes sense for them to own.

As for the CC Adventure dome, I have no idea how its doing. I only know that if you look at the overall property as a whole, its the only thing I can even possibly see them keeping that is worth anything at all, would be that Adventuredome. In the end if MGM keeps CC, I will strongly question the intelligence of the members on their board! I fully agree the Strip does not need more 5 Star properties, but you can rebuild a nice, new, clean, hotel and keep the cost down.

Vtown420
Apr 21, 2007, 2:30 PM
I haven’t been to Circus Circus since I was a teenager, but I think anything that hideous should be imploded. There is no reason they can’t build a resort for the middle class that looks good.

I was thinking the exact same thing about moving all the tacky, kiddie stuff off the strip, making most of the resorts high class. But we need to keep a few cheapo casinos like Slots-A-Fun, O'Sheas, and Casino Royale in between the mega resorts. They have cheap drinks (1$ shots), better odds, and are always packed. Plus you don’t have to walk a mile through a maze to get what you are looking for (which I absolutely hate). Some times it’s better to keep it simple. If we lose these places we lose what made Vegas great. Does anyone know what will happen to Slots-A-Fun?

I also think the church next to Encore should be kept as it is. The sinners need somewhere to go repent.

I am so excited with MGM’s latest acquisition! I always knew Sahara and LV Blvd. was destined for greatness.

future29
Apr 21, 2007, 4:33 PM
bargain hunters can go to downtown. the strip should be reserved for 4 and 5 stars. theres plenty of space in downtown and south strip to build resorts for the penny pinchers.

gmcclenon
Apr 21, 2007, 4:39 PM
The obnoxious neon clown out front is already 125 feet tall.

Circus Circus is a nickel and dime cow. Sure, MGM makes a profit off of Circus Circus, because they practically got if for free in the Mandalay Resorts deal. A handful of baccarat tables at Bellagio probably have higher revenue than Circus Circus's entire casino drop. I can't find exact figures on Circus Circus's revenue, anybody have the break down on MGM's properties? Seems MGM's nicer properties get two to three times higher average prices for rooms on normal nights than Circus Circus does on its busiest nights, do the math. Even though Circus Circus shows a profit, I think they are losing money compared to what they could do on that property.

I say build cheap stuff south of the airport and make the entire Strip high class.


Las Vegas Wet (http://www.lasvegaswet.com/) is already planning all that stuff on 200 acres with several themed "Lands (http://www.lasvegaswet.com/members/lands.php)", even indoor snow skiing, SOUTH of the airport on Las Vegas Blvd. The cheap places on the Strip won't be able to compete with some of the theme park stuff that is going to be built to the south. I really think McCarran airport will be the dividing line in the future for Vegas's high budget and low budget visitors. Station Casinos also owns a big chunk of land just south of South Point.

I also heard that the county is seriously considering accelerating development of the Ivanpah airport because McCarran is maxing out much faster than expected. They're almost half way through the Environmental Impact Study already. And of course they are talking of some sort of public transport rail system from Ivanpah International, which will stop at major resorts, obviously hitting the ones south of McCarran first. Las Vegas Blvd already extends all the way to Jean. Also, MGM is developing a major subdivision in Jean.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Ivanpah%20Airport/Ivanpah1.jpg

What is going to happen to Circus Circus is a pure business decision. It generates over $80,000,000 per year in free cash flow. Compared to MGM as a whole, which generates about $800,000,000/yr in cash. $80 mil is not insignificant. So, while the revenues for CC are fairly low, the net margins there are quite high due to the absolute lack of capital expenditures at that site. What MGM will most likely attempt to do is try not to upset the apple cart during the 2 years of planning and 3 years of building PCC II. The last thing it wants to do now is panic all the employees there. After all - $400,000,000 in cash generated from that hideous clown over the next 5 years will put a nice down payment on the new construction. They'll save the clown for last. Maybe like what Echelon is doing with the Ho land. Given the likelihood that the government of the UAE is putting up the money behind this massive project, they will most likely ultimately not allow CC to exist in any form. Would not quite fit in with what I'm sure they are envisioning as being quite Dubai-esque. IMNSHO

Superfish
Apr 21, 2007, 4:53 PM
MGM Deal for Land May Inspire Building

-It says the main reason for seeking partners is to get the capital, and if that happens, construction can stat before CityCenter is finished.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/7116856.html


Project CityCenter cost has been increased to $7.4 Billion due the increases the overall project size.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/7132401.html

On semi related note Echelon is said to be $4.4 Billion now. Wouldn't be surprised in a few years to see the Sahara MGM project at $10 billion even. Rising costs?

The day we see a pedestrian bridge system finally built at Sahara intersection... oh man. the joy seeing the strip come full circle.

Superfish
Apr 21, 2007, 6:00 PM
At least the CircusCircus has some historical value. This NEW Tropicana expansion however is an atrocity.

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/8602/tropicanarenderingzp0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

mdiederi
Apr 21, 2007, 6:11 PM
Shot this from way down south by the entrance to the Four Seasons at Mandalay Bay. You can see that the upper floors of Trump will have a spectacular view of the entire south end of the Strip.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/tl.jpg

mdiederi
Apr 21, 2007, 6:18 PM
At least the CircusCircus has some historical value. This NEW Tropicana expansion however is an atrocity.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/renders/tropicana20rendering.jpg

Yikes. :uhh:

Forget where I read it, but one of the columns in the press recently said they thought they might run into some problems putting that project together.

mttbox
Apr 21, 2007, 10:58 PM
[QUOTE=mdiederi;2784147]You can see that the upper floors of Trump will have a spectacular view of the entire south end of the Strip.

trumps north view will be nice too...well, will be nice soon with all the big project on the north end.

drobar
Apr 21, 2007, 11:07 PM
Yes! I am not against a resort for a more frugal type of clientelle, I am against a resort that has not aesthetic value whatsoever. They can keep their Circus Circus, just do something with it that will not scream "Tacky Vegas". It is painful to my eyes to see a beautiful building like "Sky" right next to the pink pile of dung that is Circus Circus.


I really think Circus Circus needs a good implosion job.. Cash cow or not.. It's a hideous Pink Nightmare! MGM should just cut its losses, build a non-themed resort rivaling CityCenter's size, but keep it affordable so that it still appeals to the middle income folks. For that matter, I think they should get rid of Excalibur, and Monte Carlo. Monte Carlo should go because it looks like a prison, and because it would allow for an expansion of CityCenter.. Excalibur because it looks like something out of disney world, only more tacky.. But first and foremost, that Pink Nightmare has got to go..

drobar
Apr 21, 2007, 11:39 PM
OMG! What is that? That is worse than "Blue Aladdin"!:koko:

At least the CircusCircus has some historical value. This NEW Tropicana expansion however is an atrocity.

http://vegastodayandtomorrow.com/images/tropicana%20rendering.jpg

MrV
Apr 22, 2007, 12:54 AM
Yikes. :uhh:

Forget where I read it, but one of the columns in the press recently said they thought they might run into some problems putting that project together.

I think I read somewhere (I think it was via a link on the Las Vegas Death Watch website, but I'm not sure) that they might not be able to do it as they had planned when they made this rendering (business as (almost) usual in the resort during renovations and keeping the two current towers), and that there new plan might consist of getting rid of one tower, laying off people (I guess during construction), probably because of a complete or partial closing of the resort. It would'nt surprise me if they eventually decide to implode the whole thing, nor would it surprise me if nothing significant happens the next 5 years or so with the property, especially if Circus Circus and/or Frontier closes within the next couple of years and more mid-market tourists need a new 'home'.

It generates over $80,000,000 per year in free cash flow. Compared to MGM as a whole, which generates about $800,000,000/yr in cash. $80 mil is not insignificant. So, while the revenues for CC are fairly low, the net margins there are quite high due to the absolute lack of capital expenditures at that site.

Maybe I misinterpretet your calculations/numbers, but if a resort that requires minimal investments, but still generates 10% of your cash flow, what does it say about the performance of the other 9(?) MGM resorts on the strip? 10% Would be pretty significant especially if you have as many resorts as MGM. Or dit you mean the MGM Grand?

If MGM thinks or, (more probably) calculates and forecasts that they can make more money out of their acres by replacing Circus Circus, then they'll do so, but for us to make any kind of reasonable guess, we will have to wait for more information on their plans with the aquired land and/or new rumours/inside information. I personally can't imagine that MGM expects/plans Circus Circus in its current form to last competitive for more then 5 to 10 years, but I might be completly wrong and they probably know a bit more about this business then I do;).

I do agree with you that it is very likely that they will wait with any signigicant changes to Circus Circus after they have finished,or are well on their way developing their newly aquired parts plus probably the rv park and motel.

Maybe like what Echelon is doing with the Ho land.
Echelon in its current form does not offer any residential program, does it? Will they use the Ho land for hotel condo's or whatever kind of residence/hotel combination they can think of, or will they use it to expand the resort and/or add a boutique hotel?

jazfingr
Apr 22, 2007, 2:27 AM
In all fairness concerning the Trop design, this is obviously a quick, first rendering showing how the property can hold the extra towers. I sincerely hope and believe that it could finally morph into a good looking resort.

I think 10,000+ rooms is a little extreme for 40 acres.

I love the idea that it will still be the Trop and be a mid-roller place.

Did you guys see my new Trop page (http://vegastodayandtomorrow.com/tropicana.htm)

My two cents.

Taurus702B
Apr 22, 2007, 2:59 AM
I’m not sure why some seem to think MGM cares if there is a pink monstrosity next to their
competitor’s luxury resort. MGM’s Gem is south strip. If I was MGM, I’d build a fifty foot clown
on Circus Circus to steer the higher cliental away from Echelon place towards CityCenter.
Circus Circus is MGM’s Walmart Brand and it’s making lots of money.
I wouldn’t wager money on a classy resort replacing too soon.

Besides, what fun would Vegas be if it lost all its tacky grandeur.


Side Note: The Clown’s giant pink ass would be facing Echelon’s luxury suites

Hell yeah.

Taurus702B
Apr 22, 2007, 3:07 AM
I really think Circus Circus needs a good implosion job.. Cash cow or not.. It's a hideous Pink Nightmare! MGM should just cut its losses, build a non-themed resort rivaling CityCenter's size, but keep it affordable so that it still appeals to the middle income folks. For that matter, I think they should get rid of Excalibur, and Monte Carlo. Monte Carlo should go because it looks like a prison, and because it would allow for an expansion of CityCenter.. Excalibur because it looks like something out of disney world, only more tacky.. But first and foremost, that Pink Nightmare has got to go..

They can't just remove the Monte Carlo because it is ugly. I really don't like this new classy Vegas too much. I remember I went to the Venetian and asked if they have any arcades and they don't have ANY at all. If companies keep building these new resorts for the high-class/wealthy people then there will be nothing much for the average joe left. I miss Wet N' Wild!

vegasrain84
Apr 22, 2007, 3:16 AM
They can't just remove the Monte Carlo because it is ugly. I really don't like this new classy Vegas too much. I remember I went to the Venetian and asked if they have any arcades and they don't have ANY at all. If companies keep building these new resorts for the high-class/wealthy people then there will be nothing much for the average joe left. I miss Wet N' Wild!

Sure they can! Its Vegas! They got rid of Stardust and it was only 4 years older than Monte Carlo. They got rid of the Desert Inn, and the newer towers were only a few years old.. Look at all the Resorts that have been imploded over the last 10 or 15 years.. If there is a market for new classy resorts, then they will build it, and they will come. When they stop coming, then they will have to rethink their plans, but until then, there's no reason to stop progress..

Patrick
Apr 22, 2007, 4:15 AM
Nonono, I dont think Monte Carlo will be leaving anytime soon. I dont really have a problem with its towers.

I'm glad they are keeping the original Tropicana Towers, good call.

philip
Apr 22, 2007, 5:51 AM
Monte Carlo is my favorite moderate resort. The rate is affordable, the swimming pools are amazing (many pools with a lazy river and a wave pool!), and the interior still looks great. Besides, the hotel just received a AAA 4-diamond rating, I think (and I hope) it will stay for a while.

I don't know how you guys calculate the profit at Circus Circus. But the last time I went there, the place is VERY crowded, and that includes the Adventure Dome, the Circus show area, and the casino floor. The place is very popular among Latinos because they are budget travelers and they have lots of kids who love to spend the whole day at the dome. If this place is not generating profit, then I don't know what is.

The new Tropicana looks more like a hotel need to be imploded, not to be built. The old towers look, well old. The building on the right looks oh so tacky, the building in the back looks like Aladdin, the building on the far left looks like an old office building, the building on the near left looks the best however it does not fit in with the others. It's like the face of Michael Jackson, the more they try to fix it, the worse it gets. :haha:

Patrick
Apr 22, 2007, 7:48 AM
That's what they said about the Eiffel Tower after it was first built.


Yes, but the Eiffel Tower was originally Temporary, and it wasnt shaped like a ding-dong.

Patrick
Apr 22, 2007, 9:09 AM
New Panorama Towers Promo Video
Features New Renderings of Tower III and is pretty cool.
http://www.panoramatowers.com/volume01/panoramavideoweb.html

4275 Dean Martin Still Alive
Yeah, New but boreish renderings:
http://www.rockertower.com/
http://www.rockertower.com/large_images/image4.jpg

mdiederi
Apr 22, 2007, 4:03 PM
4275 Dean Martin Still Alive

They say it will have "robotic parking".

Hey, wait a minute, isn't that the same land where they're trying to pitch this West Strip concept (http://www.weststrip.com/)?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/renders/VEGAS_CITYVIEW__Philippe-yang__op_7.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Picture7.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Picture6.png

mdiederi
Apr 22, 2007, 4:08 PM
Yay! Someone feels the same way as me about Barbary Coast....I say knock it down and put some kind of pedestrian plaza there. the last thing that space needs is another narrow, ridiculous development.
Here's another concept render for that lot.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/renders/Picture3.png

mdiederi
Apr 22, 2007, 5:35 PM
Article by Jeff Simpson (http://lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/business/2007/apr/22/566686897.html) about the Molasky office building. Also talks about Fontainebleau, but it appears he doesn't know it's been under construction since February. Also talks about the fate of Circus Circus, doubting it will last past the end of this decade (a couple years).

ScottG
Apr 22, 2007, 5:55 PM
no you can see the rocker tower site is excluded in that rendering.

Patrick
Apr 22, 2007, 6:04 PM
They say it will have "robotic parking".

Hey, wait a minute, isn't that the same land where they're trying to pitch this

No, look closely, theres space in the rendering for the tower.

mdiederi
Apr 22, 2007, 7:09 PM
Oh, okay. Man, they can really squeeze those condo towers on little sites. They'll probably eventually be built on every remaining small lot up and down the Strip.

Patrick
Apr 22, 2007, 8:06 PM
More Stuff.

CityCenter's sexy new website:
http://www.citycenter.com/

Like omg. CityCenter live.
http://www.earthcam.net/images/5d22649faf6790e9f0ba5a5b6abee6d7/mgmmirage.jpg

These pics arent mine

Palms doin its Thang, hmm needs more PALMS logos!!
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/550/dsc0298hi2.jpg

Pallazo bein big.
http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/9191/dsc0457ar1.jpg

Wynn bein a showoff
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/8049/dsc0354se3.jpg

Check out Trump's Allignment. Ego much? The renderings kind lied, The building looks wider, giving it a shorter appearence.
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2999/dsc0550dy5.jpg

The three monsters
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/v-1.jpg

philip
Apr 22, 2007, 10:19 PM
The CityCenter website has been there for many months now.

Vegas Grows Up
Apr 23, 2007, 3:26 AM
New pics taken last night 4/21/07

The 10 kilowatt power plant at the MGM MIRAGE CityCenter development (http://www.vegascondoscene.com/mgm-citycenter.html)
http://item.slide.com/r/1/125/i/uOeGjX3r7T9KjdjhB6dGBWLl_5Ham81l/.jpg

Planet Hollywood
http://item.slide.com/r/1/80/i/oT54_CGr4j9W8o4vQjrPgxOv_jpaLtRK/.jpg

Signature at MGM Grand (http://www.vegascondoscene.com/mgm-signature.html)
http://item.slide.com/r/1/115/i/-icqjkFH2z-g7IjUihlnmozvJjnHUWzB/.jpg

The Jockey Club East Tower
http://item.slide.com/r/1/106/i/OgOF4kM46z8kbqRLuHaRaISaJkRd-T_b/jpg

Trump International Las Vegas (http://www.vegascondoscene.com/trump-las-vegas.html) hits the 64th floor!
http://item.slide.com/r/1/54/i/S5ogByOP7z-t2yAeGHkhdLyG_rwXhPbf/

CityCenter on site cement plant
http://item.slide.com/r/1/2/i/6YD3PwyD7j-Oohw_2HCRNIy8G-OvZh8v/jpg

A sunset shot of the Panorama Towers Condos (http://www.vegascondoscene.com/panorama-towers.html)
http://item.slide.com/r/1/59/i/GhqQkKE80j8fBI69_3XZHiBezo4AzgYP/jpg

mdiederi
Apr 23, 2007, 3:45 AM
New pics taken last night 4/21/07

The 10 kilowatt power plant at the
Ah, so that's what that structure is. How will it generate power? Does it burn coal, oil? Solar? Don't tell me it's gonna be nuclear? :omg:

kenratboy
Apr 23, 2007, 5:05 AM
Ah, so that's what that structure is. How will it generate power? Does it burn coal, oil? Solar? Don't tell me it's gonna be nuclear? :omg:

Obviously not a nuke, but what the h3ll is it!?

heyyoucharlie
Apr 23, 2007, 5:22 AM
Obviously not a nuke, but what the h3ll is it!?

My guess would be steam???

Superfish
Apr 23, 2007, 5:43 AM
Since CityCenter is a green Project, I'd say the best bet is natural gas turbines. Coal is too polluting.

Wait a minute, are you sure it's not 10 MEGAWATTS? 10 kilowatts will barely light up CityCenter's marquee sign on the street. My hairdryer uses 1 kilowatt of power!


MGM Mirage's mammoth new Strip development, Project CityCenter, will not only be the state's largest megaresort, it will also be its largest energy user. The $7.4 billion complex of hotels, residences, shops and casinos will require enough electricity to power 91,000 homes.

CityCenter is estimated to require a peak load of 80 megawatts, eventually ramping up to 130 megawatts upon build-out, says Nevada Power. One megawatt is enough to service 700 homes.

The new Strip complex will account for roughly 2.2 percent of the Las Vegas Valley's total electrical consumption on a hot summer day. That doesn't include any on-site emergency back-up generators -- a common practice among Strip operators.

...The Venetian Resort Casino, for example, has a peak demand of 12 megawatts...
http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/articles/2005/10/07/news/news01.txt

beets281
Apr 23, 2007, 5:43 AM
Is the contrast off on your camera or did you photo edit?

Steven C.
Apr 23, 2007, 5:47 AM
Ah, the tower crane is going up at Cosmo. Good!

Planet Hollywood Towers has progressed a lot since the last time I looked.

Thanks.

They are selling the timeshare tower suites at an absurd rate. I work for a company that books tours for westgate, and a week ago they started their in house tour at the planet hollywood casino, beside the sports book and the stomp showroom... today at 12:30 they had NO REPS available, and when i went up there with a couple, about 40 people in line to take the tour.

That project needs to be fasttracked. If the sales are any indication, they could do so... but it is a private company still (westgate), so who knows.

Patrick
Apr 23, 2007, 5:49 AM
Planet Hollywood looks good, but they need to change the yellow flood lighting, dosnt work well with the new theme, maybe white will do?

Superfish
Apr 23, 2007, 5:49 AM
If this article is correct, I think PH Towers is the largest singular timeshare complex in the nation.

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/articles/2007/04/21/news/iq_13827274.txt

Good thing they abbreviated it to PH, Planet Hollywood Towers is just too long to say and spell out.

Steven C.
Apr 23, 2007, 5:51 AM
Yeah, that's where the Conrad-Majestic-Waldorf Astoria (http://vegastodayandtomorrow.com/majestic.htm) thing is supposed to go.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/Majestic.jpg

The Riviera and the Frontier are the only two significant properties left that are up for sale on the Strip.

a side note.
Notice keeps coming that the tenants will have to move from those buildings there, but they keep postponing it... also, dont know if it is still inside, but a few months ago i saw a cool model for the majestic inside the old la concha remains.

the timeshare booth across from the riv keeps getting told to be ready to pack up and move out, and thats been a rumor for the past eight months or so!

Steven C.
Apr 23, 2007, 5:55 AM
At least the CircusCircus has some historical value. This NEW Tropicana expansion however is an atrocity.

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/8602/tropicanarenderingzp0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

but that is done with markers and pencil crayon. let's wait until a CGI model exists, ,and then see what it looks like.

Still, i think they want to not compete with the bellagio etc, so they will keep the old vegas theme and mid level market, which helps to keep costs low for that massive project which should cost alot more than it looks to.

Heck, just building the westgate towers costs $750 million... Trop is bigger than that with extensive renos to what exists now. So the few billion price tag is cheap when you think of it.

VEGA$MAN
Apr 23, 2007, 10:16 AM
They can't just remove the Monte Carlo because it is ugly. I really don't like this new classy Vegas too much. I remember I went to the Venetian and asked if they have any arcades and they don't have ANY at all. If companies keep building these new resorts for the high-class/wealthy people then there will be nothing much for the average joe left. I miss Wet N' Wild!

And Thank God Almighty for these companies to weed out the last remaining elements of this and make the town strictly for upscale adults!

Sorry, but your post conjured up the image of Randy Quaid's brilliant and frighteningly realistic portrayal of the white trash trailer-park redneck in the flick Vegas Vacation with Chevy Chase.

Are you joking about the Venetian? :haha: The Venetian? Do you think Sheldon Adelson somehow wanted the name of his masterpiece homage to one of Europe's grandest resort cities to imply the possibility of such suburban trashiness? That's like going to Neiman Marcus and asking for $50 suits. Hello???

The Disneyfication of Vegas in the 80s failed miserably because it was a violation of what Vegas was meant to be. Vegas is no longer an average joe hangout for blue collar types anymore, wanting to slime by with cheap hotel rates and cheap buffet meals after gambling on penny slots! So, blow the living hell outta of Circus Circus and Excalibur puleese! AND LEAVE THE $%^&*(@ KIDS AT HOME! There's nothing more detracting than fanny-pack wearing couples from Arkansas pushing around a baby buggy at 3am in a casino! You people don't belong here, let alone your kids! Vegas was invented for adults of means as a chic getaway and needs to go back to its roots and keep developing in that direction as it has only recently started doing. Hopefully, as the pricing on entertainment, restaurants, and hotel rates keeps going up, it will eventually keep the punks, lowlifes, and other assorted trash at bay.

And for the 'avergae joes', please look for the arcades in your local towns. There's no room for such here! :whip:

jazfingr
Apr 23, 2007, 10:26 AM
For the Trop, I would like to see a better plan for maximizing views form the existing towers,
and for better overall ascetics.

I worked up a quick study based on; the 40 acre site, the
10,000+ room count, and keeping the existing towers.

My plan takes peds from MGM and Excalibur into a (Mirage like) tropical
paradise, with casino, retail and restaurants below and above the
mezzanine level.

I re-skinned the old towers and knocked off the gold
(crystal shaped) crap on top (which their rendering shows
intact, yuk).

The side of the existing tower would be retrofitted with a (grey water) waterfall.

Maybe someone over there will take a look and go back to
the drawing board.

Your comments are welcomed. :D

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/203/469755679_8cf7c9bb1f_o.jpg
.
.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/200/469755681_f2a5b0fedc_o.jpg

NYC2ATX
Apr 23, 2007, 1:01 PM
Here's another concept render for that lot.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/renders/Picture3.png

ewwww....who proposed that? horrible.

atrocious my ass, the new trop is going to be absolutely fantastic.

VegasMatt
Apr 23, 2007, 5:30 PM
And for the 'avergae joes', please look for the arcades in your local towns. There's no room for such here! :whip:

Although I agree, the Strip is probably not the best place for kids, I think you're missing what makes Vegas Great. What make's this town incredible is that there is something here for everyone, despite income levels. If you’re looking a purely high brow casino experience, you should try Monte Carlo (the one in Monaco). I think most of us like the nice mix.

VegasMatt
Apr 23, 2007, 5:49 PM
Here’s an article on the updates in Planet Hollywood.

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/articles/2007/04/23/news/iq_13827274.txt

I found it interesting that the television show “Extra” will have a studio near the front of the Casino.

Don't miss the video interview at the end.

http://lvbusinesspress.com/media/2007/planet_hollywood/

The_Analyst
Apr 23, 2007, 8:21 PM
I was thinking that instead of a narrow tower on Barbary Coast (or Bill's whatchamacallit) perhaps Harrah's ought to consider a casino spanning Flamingo Road similar to the LV Convention Center. You widen Flamingo where BC is by adding a couple extra right-turn lanes Westbound onto LV Blvd as well as left turns. Also, add right turns off of LV Blvd northbound. In return for better traffic flow at that intersection, the county approves a casino over Flamingo. Harrah's could use the existing empty entry space in front of Bally's on ground level for traffic pick up/drop off. The pedestrian bridges crossing the Strip would empty right into the elevated casino. A new tower could rise above this. Harrah's would have a large central casino with connections directly to Bally's/Paris and Flamingo with only the BC needing demolition.

DMaldon762
Apr 23, 2007, 9:58 PM
Does anyone think that there are 5,000 people (figure 2 per room) in the world that want to stay at the Trop at the same time? I like your proposal much better than the rendering they put out but I just don't see the Trop going to 10,000 rooms.

jazfingr
Apr 23, 2007, 10:16 PM
ewwww....who proposed that? horrible.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/renders/Picture3.png



That is a very old proposal form when Boyd owned the property.

mdiederi
Apr 23, 2007, 10:46 PM
Today the Drudge Report, of all places, has a headline saying "VEGAS CASINO BOOM CONTINUES; INTENSIFIES... DEVELOPING...", but no link. Wonder if he's getting a scoop on something new or just gonna link to a story about the latest developments?

hotdog
Apr 23, 2007, 10:52 PM
On Monday, Goldman Sachs paid $1.3 billion for the four Nevada casinos owned by Carl C. Icahn’s American Real Estate Partners, including the Stratosphere Las Vegas Hotel and Casino, but also a precious 17 acres of undeveloped land on the strip.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/24/business/24vegas.html?ref=business

mdiederi
Apr 23, 2007, 11:19 PM
Ah, that's probably the scoop.

So the Strat has been sold, interesting.

I wonder which "17 acres of undeveloped land on the strip" they are talking about?

Edit: in this article (http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/070423/americanrealestate_takeover.html?.v=3), they say that the 17 acres is just the land around the Strat, which to my understanding isn't technically on THE Strip proper, it's actually in an area referred to as "the naked city".

justdefended
Apr 23, 2007, 11:42 PM
On Monday, Goldman Sachs paid $1.3 billion for the four Nevada casinos owned by Carl C. Icahn’s American Real Estate Partners, including the Stratosphere Las Vegas Hotel and Casino, but also a precious 17 acres of undeveloped land on the strip.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/24/business/24vegas.html?ref=business

So Stratosphere, to blow up or not to blow up? I wouldn't mind seeing something else there.

drobar
Apr 24, 2007, 1:09 AM
Some salient points.....
The Strip would do well to become as upscale as possible. This city is known worldwide for it's shopping, gambling, concerts, fights, ect... It shouldn't be known for the thoughtless parents who drag their kids out at the wee hours of the morning. Things like Circus Circus, Excalibur, ect... only serve to entice that kind of crowd.
That doesn't mean Vegas can't cater to families. Take Las Vegas Wet for example. That will be a major money maker if it ever gets built. Someone should step in and put a major amusement park on the South Side as well. It would redefine that area.

And Thank God Almighty for these companies to weed out the last remaining elements of this and make the town strictly for upscale adults!

Sorry, but your post conjured up the image of Randy Quaid's brilliant and frighteningly realistic portrayal of the white trash trailer-park redneck in the flick Vegas Vacation with Chevy Chase.

Are you joking about the Venetian? :haha: The Venetian? Do you think Sheldon Adelson somehow wanted the name of his masterpiece homage to one of Europe's grandest resort cities to imply the possibility of such suburban trashiness? That's like going to Neiman Marcus and asking for $50 suits. Hello???

The Disneyfication of Vegas in the 80s failed miserably because it was a violation of what Vegas was meant to be. Vegas is no longer an average joe hangout for blue collar types anymore, wanting to slime by with cheap hotel rates and cheap buffet meals after gambling on penny slots! So, blow the living hell outta of Circus Circus and Excalibur puleese! AND LEAVE THE $%^&*(@ KIDS AT HOME! There's nothing more detracting than fanny-pack wearing couples from Arkansas pushing around a baby buggy at 3am in a casino! You people don't belong here, let alone your kids! Vegas was invented for adults of means as a chic getaway and needs to go back to its roots and keep developing in that direction as it has only recently started doing. Hopefully, as the pricing on entertainment, restaurants, and hotel rates keeps going up, it will eventually keep the punks, lowlifes, and other assorted trash at bay.

And for the 'avergae joes', please look for the arcades in your local towns. There's no room for such here! :whip:

NYC2ATX
Apr 24, 2007, 1:22 AM
So Stratosphere, to blow up or not to blow up? I wouldn't mind seeing something else there.

Nah, I think that the Strat will be there forever. At least the tower will. My idea was that they knock down the hotel, and just leave the tower as an attraction, similar to the purpose of the Space Needle in Seattle.

It'd be a psycho task to knock down that tower anyway.

ScottG
Apr 24, 2007, 2:13 AM
thats a dumb question - the strat is not goin anywhere.

mdiederi
Apr 24, 2007, 2:44 AM
Yeah, the view looking south from the top of the Strat at night is pretty good and worth keeping, even if you wouldn't want to stay at the place. but a company like Goldman Sacks and all their resources and subsidiaries and strategic partners could buy the entire naked city district and turn it into anything they want. Hell, they just raised a $20 billion dollar private equity fund and their market cap is over $90 billion. These guys have to have something in mind if they want to turn a profit on this purchase. Obviously the land that the strat is on by itself is not worth the billion dollars they just paid, so they're keeping the tower in my guesstimation.

justdefended
Apr 24, 2007, 3:09 AM
From today's Bloomberg article regarding Goldman Sach's acquisition:

"Goldman is making a decent long-term investment in where the Strip is heading,'' said Robert LaFleur, a gaming analyst at Susquehanna Financial Group in Stamford, Connecticut. "The Stratosphere and the land could be more valuable imploded and built up with something else.''

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aU9fITBTMX7I&refer=news

I don't think its a question of whether its a great viewing point for the city, but whether that tower is generating enough revenue to exist. With the North Strip transforming toward higher end properties, the tower could obstruct a grander development for Goldman in the future.

CHAPINM1
Apr 24, 2007, 3:18 AM
From today's Bloomberg article regarding Goldman Sach's acquisition:

"Goldman is making a decent long-term investment in where the Strip is heading,'' said Robert LaFleur, a gaming analyst at Susquehanna Financial Group in Stamford, Connecticut. "The Stratosphere and the land could be more valuable imploded and built up with something else.''

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aU9fITBTMX7I&refer=news

I don't think its a question of whether its a great viewing point for the city, but whether that tower is generating enough revenue to exist. With the North Strip transforming toward higher end properties, the tower could obstruct a grander development for Goldman in the future.

I cannot believe what I am even hearing! The Stratosphere is basically now a landmark for Vegas, the highest point in the city for observation, dining, weddings, banquets, among other things. That's horseshit to begin with that someone would even consider emploding the Stratosphere!!! However, if they put in observatory and resturant in the Las Vegas Tower I'd feel a little better... Still, I don't even know how this even came into fruitation. :rolleyes:

Superfish
Apr 24, 2007, 3:23 AM
The naked city I thought would have been a nice place to build, especially with the heights allowed in the area of the Strat. I'm not a fan of the Strat's design but it like the views and it is an icon. They better give us a new tower if they even think about imploding it.

But how on earth do you implode something that tall anyway without big dangerous chunks of tower smashing into buildings within a mile radius of it?

They should keep it, maybe add that 1800 foot antenna extension on it too that it was denied all those years ago. It's a lot easier.

mdiederi
Apr 24, 2007, 4:02 AM
From today's Bloomberg article regarding Goldman Sach's acquisition:

"Goldman is making a decent long-term investment in where the Strip is heading,'' said Robert LaFleur, a gaming analyst at Susquehanna Financial Group in Stamford, Connecticut. "The Stratosphere and the land could be more valuable imploded and built up with something else.''

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aU9fITBTMX7I&refer=news

I don't think its a question of whether its a great viewing point for the city, but whether that tower is generating enough revenue to exist. With the North Strip transforming toward higher end properties, the tower could obstruct a grander development for Goldman in the future.
Well, that's a fine analysis and all, but GS probably could have gotten a better positioned chunk of land on the real strip for about half a billion dollars less if they had made a bid for the Riviera. The tower itself doesn't have a very big foot print at all. They'll probably build around it and keep the tower as a landmark.

But if they do take it down, the only thing similar I can think of are some super tall industrial chimneys that have been demolished, but aren't those usually toppled over, or is there a way to deconstruct thick concrete like that on such a thin tower without killing people below? It doesn't seem like the right type of structure to collapse straight down if you implode it, it would tip over, and I have had nightmares about that.:runaway:

CHAPINM1
Apr 24, 2007, 4:42 AM
I'd have to think that they would keep the Stratosphere since it is an icon. Also, it really does take up a small footprint. About the Las Vegas Tower, sure the design isn't the greatest, however it will be a landmark and over time people will get used to it and possibly grow to love it...

lfc4life
Apr 24, 2007, 2:06 PM
Implode the Stratosphere :crazy: surely not. But this is Vegas, nothing is sacred.

If they did implode the Strat I wouldn't be too hopeful that anything would be built in its place: Landmark any one.

For those that say it couldn't be done, keep this in mind; there is nothing within half a mile north, south, east or west of the Strat (at least nothing of importance anyway)

BruceH
Apr 24, 2007, 3:46 PM
Implode the Stratosphere :crazy: surely not. But this is Vegas, nothing is sacred.

If they did implode the Strat I wouldn't be too hopeful that anything would be built in its place: Landmark any one.

For those that say it couldn't be done, keep this in mind; there is nothing within half a mile north, south, east or west of the Strat (at least nothing of importance anyway)
I believe the new Allure residential condo tower is within a half mile of the Stratosphere.

VegasBound
Apr 24, 2007, 8:13 PM
The issue I see is if the Las Vegas Tower gets built then the marquee of the Stratosphere is instantly devalued. Why would the average tourist go out of their way to stand in line to get to the top of the Stratosphere when they can very well get an even higher view at the Las Vegas tower? Plus even without the height advantage the tower will have a more upscale image and location.

Vtown420
Apr 24, 2007, 8:29 PM
Because of the rides at the top, it’s unique.

This discussion is silly. The Stratosphere better not be going anywhere. I love the Strat! There is plenty of room to build around it. I would hope there would be some opposition from the city to imploding it. You can’t just go around destroying landmarks. Could someone just go buy the Space Needle and implode it?

jake
Apr 24, 2007, 8:29 PM
And Thank God Almighty for these companies to weed out the last remaining elements of this and make the town strictly for upscale adults!

Sorry, but your post conjured up the image of Randy Quaid's brilliant and frighteningly realistic portrayal of the white trash trailer-park redneck in the flick Vegas Vacation with Chevy Chase.

Are you joking about the Venetian? :haha: The Venetian? Do you think Sheldon Adelson somehow wanted the name of his masterpiece homage to one of Europe's grandest resort cities to imply the possibility of such suburban trashiness? That's like going to Neiman Marcus and asking for $50 suits. Hello???

The Disneyfication of Vegas in the 80s failed miserably because it was a violation of what Vegas was meant to be. Vegas is no longer an average joe hangout for blue collar types anymore, wanting to slime by with cheap hotel rates and cheap buffet meals after gambling on penny slots! So, blow the living hell outta of Circus Circus and Excalibur puleese! AND LEAVE THE $%^&*(@ KIDS AT HOME! There's nothing more detracting than fanny-pack wearing couples from Arkansas pushing around a baby buggy at 3am in a casino! You people don't belong here, let alone your kids! Vegas was invented for adults of means as a chic getaway and needs to go back to its roots and keep developing in that direction as it has only recently started doing. Hopefully, as the pricing on entertainment, restaurants, and hotel rates keeps going up, it will eventually keep the punks, lowlifes, and other assorted trash at bay.

And for the 'avergae joes', please look for the arcades in your local towns. There's no room for such here! :whip:



Yes, VEGA$MAN! Yes! I hope they take the low class hookers with them!! Only high class hookers should be left in vegas. :tongue4:

You should go to Disney with the kids and get your low class hookers on your local streets. Leave vegas for gentlemen with discerning tastes! :whip:

VegasBound
Apr 24, 2007, 9:34 PM
Yes, VEGA$MAN! Yes! I hope they take the low class hookers with them!! Only high class hookers should be left in vegas. :tongue4:

You should go to Disney with the kids and get your low class hookers on your local streets. Leave vegas for gentlemen with discerning tastes! :whip:

Precisely! And place a guard shack at both ends of the strip. No admission without a jacket and collared shirt and must pay entry toll of one tin of beluga (no counterfeits).

lfc4life
Apr 24, 2007, 10:19 PM
Because of the rides at the top, it’s unique.

This discussion is silly. The Stratosphere better not be going anywhere. I love the Strat! There is plenty of room to build around it. I would hope there would be some opposition from the city to imploding it. You can’t just go around destroying landmarks. Could someone just go buy the Space Needle and implode it?

I love the Strat too; the rides at the top means it kicks the ass of every tall stucture i have even been to the top of such as the eiffel tower, cn tower, ESB, Sears and Hancock.

The scary thing is that it could be imploded though no matter how cool it is, for some stupid celebrity condo or even a parking lot :hell:

The_Analyst
Apr 24, 2007, 11:38 PM
I think demolishing the Stratosphere Tower itself is unlikely. The construction costs are long since paid off and maintenance is probably not outlandish so as long as visitor/restaurant revenue covers operating costs it would be more costly to take it down than to just operate it as is. The hotel and casino is another story, though. From day one that place has been crap. Stupak was underfunded in building it and Icahn is a cheapskate. Unfortunately that reputation is well known making the Stratosphere name equated with a dump. What Goldman could do is take down the casino/hotel or at least do a major gut remodel/addition to the hotel and casino and then rename it (something benign like "Ventagio Hotel and Casino"). The tower itself could keep the name Stratosphere to further distance the hotel from the tower from a marketing standpoint.

However, I wouldn't count on anything like that any time soon. Goldman Sachs is an investor, not a visionary. They'll hire consultants and identify the best way to improve their investment and squeeze the most returns. That might mean a few upgrades but you'll see something more akin to Planet Hollywood or Tropicana is my bet rather than a PCC, Wynn, or Echelon.

SpeedyFarrar
Apr 25, 2007, 7:32 AM
I agree that leaving the Strat tower up would work, if they imploded everything but the tower and redid the interior and roof of the tower, and build a new hotel/casino mega resort, at a similar luxury level as The Mirage or Caesars. The tower could be a part of the new hotel.....remove the rides, get a "big name" chef to run a new rotating restaurant, put the high limit casino area up there, put in a nice club/lounge with an outdoor deck (like the Voodoo Lounge or ghostbar at Rio and Palms), maybe a pool area on the roof, plus keep the observation deck. There's alot of potential left in that tower, the ratty hotel/casino is just holding it back. I agree it also could use a new name.

Steven C.
Apr 25, 2007, 8:38 AM
Because of the rides at the top, it’s unique.

This discussion is silly. The Stratosphere better not be going anywhere. I love the Strat! There is plenty of room to build around it. I would hope there would be some opposition from the city to imploding it. You can’t just go around destroying landmarks. Could someone just go buy the Space Needle and implode it?

it is also the only view from that high up of the city without having to book a room for several hundred dollars a night.

and it is still a family destination. no one has mentioned that. it is still a place where american superstars is a nice family show, and a buffet doesnt cost $25 a person.

a perfect reason to keep it:
IT MAKES A TON OF MONEY!

mdiederi
Apr 25, 2007, 2:30 PM
Goldman Sachs is an investor, not a visionary. They'll hire consultants and identify the best way to improve their investment and squeeze the most returns.
GS bought it through their Whitehall Street Real Estate Fund, which also has a controlling interest in the Las Vegas Hilton. Whitehall Street Real Estate Fund's asset base includes more than 138 million square feet of commercial space, 66,000 multifamily units and 70,000 hotel rooms. These guys know what they are doing and must have some sort of game plan for the Strat. The Stratosphere purchase is their first gaming property (plus the smaller casinos in the deal) where they will have sole control. It's anyone's guess what they do next, but I think they'll just remodel the Strat hotel and expand it on the vacant land north of it, and rename it, and then build a separate brand across the street on that acreage. One problem with the Strat is that it's isolated, so building another resort across the street will generate a critical mass which is a known strategy for boosting visitor numbers in the casino business. If there are more options in that area then more people will go there. If they were smart, they would also buy all the land on the northest corner of Sahara and LVB and all the land south of the Strat down to Sahara.

Taurus702B
Apr 25, 2007, 5:30 PM
The issue I see is if the Las Vegas Tower gets built then the marquee of the Stratosphere is instantly devalued. Why would the average tourist go out of their way to stand in line to get to the top of the Stratosphere when they can very well get an even higher view at the Las Vegas tower? Plus even without the height advantage the tower will have a more upscale image and location.

Yeah but they don't have rides atop the LVT. I think the rides is what will make the Stratopshere more attractive. They still have room to add a new rollar coaster up there. Not like the high rollar though.:banana:

Taurus702B
Apr 25, 2007, 5:41 PM
I agree that leaving the Strat tower up would work, if they imploded everything but the tower and redid the interior and roof of the tower, and build a new hotel/casino mega resort, at a similar luxury level as The Mirage or Caesars. The tower could be a part of the new hotel.....remove the rides, get a "big name" chef to run a new rotating restaurant, put the high limit casino area up there, put in a nice club/lounge with an outdoor deck (like the Voodoo Lounge or ghostbar at Rio and Palms), maybe a pool area on the roof, plus keep the observation deck. There's alot of potential left in that tower, the ratty hotel/casino is just holding it back. I agree it also could use a new name.

Heh do you know how much space there is up there. You're crazy to think they will remove the rides up there. Each ride costs ateast $10 million. They already have a lounge up there and a rotating restaurant with more than enough room for the guests.

heyyoucharlie
Apr 25, 2007, 7:59 PM
GS bought it through their Whitehall Street Real Estate Fund, which also has a controlling interest in the Las Vegas Hilton. Whitehall Street Real Estate Fund's asset base includes more than 138 million square feet of commercial space, 66,000 multifamily units and 70,000 hotel rooms. These guys know what they are doing and must have some sort of game plan for the Strat. The Stratosphere purchase is their first gaming property (plus the smaller casinos in the deal) where they will have sole control. It's anyone's guess what they do next, but I think they'll just remodel the Strat hotel and expand it on the vacant land north of it, and rename it, and then build a separate brand across the street on that acreage. One problem with the Strat is that it's isolated, so building another resort across the street will generate a critical mass which is a known strategy for boosting visitor numbers in the casino business. If there are more options in that area then more people will go there. If they were smart, they would also buy all the land on the northest corner of Sahara and LVB and all the land south of the Strat down to Sahara.


Now there's a good idea...buy all those crappy businesses (the Worlds Largest "and most Tacky" Gift Shop)... Then follow MGM's lead and turn the Strat into an area like City Center... Best part would be the height allowed for those bldgs...can anyone say condos over 1000 feet?

Silas
Apr 25, 2007, 9:18 PM
One thing people need to remember about all these future CityCenter speculations:

CityCENTER.

It's not called -- CityInTheMiddleofNowhere. Or CityOnTheExtremeNorthEndOfTheStrip.

It's called CityCenter because it is adjacent to Bellagio and at the very heart of the strip.

Building a world class CityCenter project will not happen unless the location is perfect.

NYC2ATX
Apr 25, 2007, 9:49 PM
One thing people need to remember about all these future CityCenter speculations:

CityCENTER.

It's not called -- CityInTheMiddleofNowhere. Or CityOnTheExtremeNorthEndOfTheStrip.

It's called CityCenter because it is adjacent to Bellagio and at the very heart of the strip.

Building a world class CityCenter project will not happen unless the location is perfect.

Well yes...but a city can have multiple centers. Look at Atlanta or Los Angeles, even Manhattan. and yes, while the Stratosphere area may never have the central location and overall fabulosity of the CityCenter area, it is capable of much more than it is giving us now. Let us not count out that neighborhood completely yet. It can be great in its own way. ;)

mdiederi
Apr 25, 2007, 10:05 PM
Another thing to remember is that CityCenter is not even in the city limits, it's in the township of Paradise, so maybe it should be called "TownCenter".

Another thing I've been wondering about is what kind of access will CityCenter have to the freeway? Will they make Harmon an actual interchange? Right now it's just an overpass and doesn't connect to the freeway. So if you live at CityCenter and want to jump on the freeway you will have to drive through the gridlock around Bellagio or NYNY, or take Frank Sinatra all the way up to Spring Mountain or down to Russell, or you could connect to Dean Martin and hook up with Flamingo on the other side. Harmon never was a major intersection on the Strip in the past.

Rational Plan2
Apr 25, 2007, 10:27 PM
Tesco announces that it will have opened 100 stores accross LA, San Diego, Las Vegas and Phoenix by Feb 2008! 14 locations in Las Vegas and 20 in Phoenix have been announced, with more to be announced accross Southland in the next few weeks. The first stores should open in the third/fourth quarter. The first store to open Las Vegas will be at 8650 West Tropicana Avenue.

mdiederi
Apr 26, 2007, 3:01 AM
Tesco ... The first store to open Las Vegas will be at 8650 West Tropicana Avenue.
Last time I went by there that location was a Smith's grocery store.

lfc4life
Apr 26, 2007, 10:51 AM
Now there's a good idea...buy all those crappy businesses (the Worlds Largest "and most Tacky" Gift Shop)...

I agree 100% with this statement, crappy isn't the word I would use for them businesses though :hell:

I think the majority is in agreement that the Strat tower should stay without a doubt. I feel that the Strat would become more important (not less as some people are speculating here) if the LVT is built. Imagine looking at the 1888ft LVT sitting in your seat just before the X-Scream takes off, wow.

Downtown Joe
Apr 26, 2007, 5:56 PM
From the Las Vegas Sun (http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv-other/2007/apr/26/566689533.html):


New player joins downtown games

Michigan developer's plans include casinos, 22,000-seat arena
By Kristen Peterson
Las Vegas Sun

A new player jumped into the game to build an arena in downtown, unveiling its plans at an informal neighborhood meeting complete with soda and cookies.

Michigan-based developer Real Estate Interests Group (REi) showed plans for a 22,000-seat arena, three casinos, hotels and condos to a group of 40 or so business and property owners Tuesday night.

But the quaint meeting turned into a contentious battle of vision when artists and gallery owners came face to face with a proposal that would level and redevelop 73.5 acres of the gritty industrial area north of the Stratosphere.

The tract bordered by Charleston Boulevard, Main Street, Wyoming Avenue and the downtown railroad tracks now is home to furniture stores, car repair shops, small businesses, empty buildings and part of the city's Arts District.

But if REi gets its way, the area will become a mixed-use development including an arena, casinos, a sports apparel trade center similar to World Market Center, 9,100 hotel and condominium units , and more than 550,000 square feet of retail space.

Initial plans for the area, called Project Neon Lights, were revealed last year but didn't include an arena.

City officials say they need an arena to lure professional sports teams to Las Vegas. Last week, the city opened arena proposals and hopes to pick a developer within six months.

Mayor Oscar Goodman said the REi arena site at Charleston and Main would have the same chance as any other proposal - despite the fact that it wasn't among the four "preferred" sites listed in a consultant's study.

"They are in the mix," Goodman said Wednesday. "They have very deep pockets. From what I understand, they love Las Vegas and they love downtown."

Area property owners already had agreed to sell to TR Las Vegas for Project Neon Lights last year. REi would take over after those sales close in the fall.

The area is zoned for commercial and light industrial, and REi would need zoning changes to allow a mixed-use development , as well as gaming permits for the casinos.

The redevelopment could begin with arena construction in a year and would continue in phases for five to seven years, Jill Ferrari of REi says.

"It will be great to see it all plowed down someday," said Tom Prato, partner in TR Las Vegas and owner of Artistic Ironworks, which hosted Tuesday's meetings. "It would be a catalyst for things to be built here, for something great to happen."

Even if REi doesn't get the bid for the sports arena, Ferrari says, it would build an arena for year-round events, conventions and concerts. The developers haven't talked with the foundation building the Smith Center for Performing Arts in the nearby Union Park, but say their huge arena wouldn't conflict with the smaller concert center.

Artists and some business owners said they don't want the character of the area to be overwhelmed by parking garages, towers and traffic.

"If they have a great art component, then God bless them," Arts Factory owner Wes Myles said. "It's going to change. We as the neighborhood association are going to put as much influence on the design as we can. There are a handful of concerns. The Arts District is very protective of the nature of that atmosphere."

Dolores Eliades, manager of Olympic Gardens, says she's selling property on Commerce Street and supports the change: "We get to build our city all over again. I'm one of the few who love downtown. I go to the movies downtown. I eat downtown. I walk downtown. But if people don't live downtown, who's going to shop there?"

Todd VonBastiaans, who owns Atomic Todd on Commerce Street , is unhappy with the plans. "It could have been lived with if it was mixed-use only - coffee houses, book stores with living quarters above. But a sports apparel expo? I think they're trying to package it, buy it, raze it so it will sit for five years and be more profitable to sell. It's just enough information so they can get zoning changes and five years later do something else."

http://www.lasvegassun.com/graphics/overlap.jpg

justdefended
Apr 26, 2007, 6:03 PM
MGM Mirage announced today that it will invest $160 million in The M Resort, a new resort casino on Las Vegas Blvd. and St. Rose Parkway. First phase is a 400-room, 100,000 square foot casino. The remaining 40 acres (out of 80) will be for mixed-use development.

Wow with this and Southern Highlands the South Strip will be full of casino action!

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-26-2007/0004574522&EDATE=