LAS VEGAS | Boom Project Rundown! 2.0 - Page 244

CHAPINM1 · #**4861** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lfc4life

they are currently working on the 65th floor of fontainebleau which is interesting given that the hotel was only supposed to be 63 floors

Who knows? Mabye were all in for a huge suprise!!!

I'd be willing to be that this project will be over 735 feet.

sammyg · #**4862** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 12:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lfc4life

they are currently working on the 65th floor of fontainebleau which is interesting given that the hotel was only supposed to be 63 floors

It probably doesn't have any floors in the 40s to entice asian gamblers.

CHAPINM1 · #**4863** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 2:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg

It probably doesn't have any floors in the 40s to entice asian gamblers.

I'd believe it; however, it has happened before where developers can keep secrets and suprise us. I believe that the developer of this project originally wanted this to be in the 1,000 foot range, but when Crowne got the zoning approval I think that somehow had an effect on this project and the developers got what they orignally wanted.

Also, I think 65 floor are the actuall physical floors that lfc4life counted... I myself have wondered if there would be any skipped floors such as 13, floors with 4's, among others...

Right now my gut tells me that this project will be higher than 735 feet and closer to 1,000 feet as originally planned.

mdiederi · #**4864** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 4:37 AM**

Sky, across the street, is 500 feet tall, and right now the Font does not look like it's 200 feet taller yet.

lfc4life · #**4865** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 2:04 PM**

thats the latest clear shot on flickr taken just over 2 weeks ago, you can count the 62 completed floors easily in that, they seem to get through a floor a week over there, turnberry are 475 feet i believe, the top of sky reaches the 46th floor of font

http://flickr.com/photos/plagan/2896357039/

mdiederi · #**4866** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 4:25 PM**

Yeah, that photo must be at least two weeks old because they raised that crane on the left about twice as high as it is there above the highest completed floor, over a week ago. Should be raising the other cranes soon. Also think that the facade might be getting near a level where it changes design.

Tlwarnke · #**4867** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 6:18 PM**

Can anyone tell me if both cranes are still up at the Planet Hollywood Towers? Have they done anything to start the second tower yet?

Thanks,
Terry

CHAPINM1 · #**4868** Posted **Oct 14, 2008, 6:37 PM**

I know the observatory levels of the Stratosphere are roughly around 900 feet. From there it does look like it's within 200 feet. I do find it strange that they're currently working on the 65th floor and haven't even started the crown yet. I figured the last floor before the crown would have been 61, then floors 62 and 63 would have made up the crown. Also, the top floors of Fountainebleau are higher than the hotel floors and with that said, additional floors will really make an impact! Call me crazy, but I do have a hunch that it's going to be taller than we've all heard. It probably won't be, but I have a feeling it will...

justdefended · #**4869** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 3:35 AM**

HOUSING: Credit squeeze hits high rises

New Review Journal report:

21% of Trump International Hotel & Tower units have closed

57% of Palms Place units have closed

Lenders want as much as 50% down at 8 or 9 percent

CityCenter units scheduled to close in Sept. 2009

http://www.lvrj.com/business/30934179.html

True Blue · #**4870** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 4:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by justdefended

HOUSING: Credit squeeze hits high rises

New Review Journal report:

21% of Trump International Hotel & Tower units have closed

57% of Palms Place units have closed

Lenders want as much as 50% down at 8 or 9 percent

CityCenter units scheduled to close in Sept. 2009

http://www.lvrj.com/business/30934179.html

I'm one of those owners that can't close at the Trump. The best terms I can get is to put 50% down, pay 4 points at 12% interest. This was quoted to me 2 weeks before the bail out. Are you kidding me? The unit is worth less than what I paid 3 years ago and we're in a recession! Trump has not pushed my closing date because they know it's impossible for owners to get financing and they don't want to lose the few remaining buyers they have. Most owners have already walked and are now involved in a lawsuit against Trump. There are more owners suing Trump than owners that have closed.

I can see the same thing happen at the Cosmo and CityCenter. Even if the credit market improves in a year, the lending standards will be much higher for most owners to qualify. The days of 20% down with good terms for highrises are over.

mac78130 · #**4871** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 5:06 AM**

some pics from flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevglob...90879/sizes/l/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevglob...81849/sizes/l/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevglob...45662/sizes/l/

Hans Gruber · #**4872** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 9:27 AM**

I feel sorry for all of you who have lost your deposits and/or are unable to close on the new condo developments.

It kind of begs the question did Las Vegas go too far with the luxury theme too fast? Remember how Vegas tried to turn Vegas into a family friendly destination in the mid 90's which quickly fizzled. I'm thinking of the MGM amusement park which is now the MGM Towers.

In the late 90's and very early 2000's there was Reno for the AARP double wide trailer crowd and Las Vegas for those who wanted a little more luxury and better entertainment.

Today Vegas has turned to a total luxury theme. I am completely shocked at how hard Vegas is being hit by the recession/depression. I always thought sin city was invincible.

Looking back a few years as well as the current status of Vegas I think luxury went overboard. It's like being on a hot roll on a craps table for hours and nobody quits and eventually, it's all over and everybody loses their shirts.

Maybe, a little Reno (value) is what will turn Vegas back to its roots. Vegas has transformed itself faster than ever in the last 5-6 years. All of these condos next to hotels seems to be the kiss of death along with the ultra luxury prices of rooms and dinner. Vegas was always said to be recession proof, I guess the rules are changing along with everything else in America.

RandalR · #**4873** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 2:27 PM**

Part of the problem is that a lot of these newer developments are offering tiny, hermetically-sealed hotel rooms and describing the offer as "luxury condo ownership".

People aren't going to fall for that, absent a gold-rush mentality.

Fontainebleau would be wise to turn most or all their proposed condo units back into luxury hotel suites to compete with Encore. And I'm sure they had contingency plans to do that from the beginning.

lfc4life · #**4874** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 3:25 PM**

vegas was never recession proof that was a myth often citied by new york and london journalists who know nothing of whats going on in the city. we saw how bad the city was hit in the months after 9/11 and before that in 1991 with the gulf crisis

reno is doing even worse than las vegas these days http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2...noNumbers.html

ScottG · #**4875** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 7:27 PM**

from what ive seen in my office - the renderings of FB show the same heights as what was released - ive never seen a rendering of a taller FB

justdefended · #**4876** Posted **Oct 15, 2008, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans Gruber

I feel sorry for all of you who have lost your deposits and/or are unable to close on the new condo developments.

It kind of begs the question did Las Vegas go too far with the luxury theme too fast? Remember how Vegas tried to turn Vegas into a family friendly destination in the mid 90's which quickly fizzled. I'm thinking of the MGM amusement park which is now the MGM Towers.

In the late 90's and very early 2000's there was Reno for the AARP double wide trailer crowd and Las Vegas for those who wanted a little more luxury and better entertainment.

Today Vegas has turned to a total luxury theme. I am completely shocked at how hard Vegas is being hit by the recession/depression. I always thought sin city was invincible.

Looking back a few years as well as the current status of Vegas I think luxury went overboard. It's like being on a hot roll on a craps table for hours and nobody quits and eventually, it's all over and everybody loses their shirts.

Maybe, a little Reno (value) is what will turn Vegas back to its roots. Vegas has transformed itself faster than ever in the last 5-6 years. All of these condos next to hotels seems to be the kiss of death along with the ultra luxury prices of rooms and dinner. Vegas was always said to be recession proof, I guess the rules are changing along with everything else in America.

I think a lot of people are in the same boat, would love to close but can't get decent terms on a loan.

If the market doesn't turn around MGM is going to have to provide some builder incentives in order to get owners to close. If no one can borrow, they don't recoup their $2 billion in residential sales and CityCenter becomes a much more costly project on their bottom line.

fishordie · #**4877** Posted **Oct 16, 2008, 2:52 AM**

It kind of begs the question did Las Vegas go too far with the luxury theme too fast? Remember how Vegas tried to turn Vegas into a family friendly destination in the mid 90's which quickly fizzled. I'm thinking of the MGM amusement park which is now the MGM Towers.

The answer, in my opinion, is YES and I have spoken to many of the owners over the last many years attempting to get them to bring back the old Vegas.
Las Vegas was recession proof because even the big hotels could cater to average folks. Special food concessions, cheaper events, happy and fun dealers who made the losers feel almost like winners, good and cheap drinks and a perception of true value regardless of how much money you left behind at the tables.

Customer service, fun and polite servers and dealers, smiles and welcoming looks have been replaced by $17.00 cocktails, 25 dollar entry fees or more,
VIP sections with champagne buckets that start at $300.00 and suddenly the perception of Vegas being something for everyone has rapidly been replaced with a place where you need to quickly leave your money and get out so the next sucker can take your place. Dealers don't bother smiling or chatting, in most cases, points for play are only good if you work the $100 min tables for long periods of time which precludes most folks and now even the slots have a different vibe for those who enjoy that sort of thing.

Even the great eateries no longer feel like you are being catered to rather you are just the next person in line.

Most folks do not need to go to Vegas to feel second rate but many of those same folks can recall feeling like elite when they went to Vegas years ago.
Now its just a fading memory.

For those of us who live in Vegas or have family there, we rarely even go to the strip choosing to listen or see fantastic music, events or food only locals would know. But Vegas needs tourists and todays tourists do not want to made to feel like crap they still want to feel like millionaires even if it just for a weekend. Those are the folks who stoked the fires of L.V. when high rollers were hard to find.

JMHO

FOD

kenratboy · #**4878** Posted **Oct 16, 2008, 6:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lfc4life

vegas was never recession proof that was a myth often citied by new york and london journalists who know nothing of whats going on in the city. we saw how bad the city was hit in the months after 9/11 and before that in 1991 with the gulf crisis

reno is doing even worse than las vegas these days http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2...noNumbers.html

With all due respect, that article was miserable:

"The Atlantis may renovate its casino and hotel while the Peppermill may add a tower. The key to Reno's rebirth might be Station Casinos, which owns sites near the Reno-Sparks Convention Center in southern Reno, across from The Summit shopping mall."

1.) Peppermill has already built and opened the new tower
2.) The convention center is not South Reno
3.) The convention is 8 MILES AWAY from the Summit Sierra
4.) The site Station owns is across from the Summit Sierra, and it would be worth mentioning that is where Bass Pro Shop was proposed

I think that pretty much throws out any merit the article has (not attacking it because I want to pretend things are going well, as they are very slow/depressed).

mac78130 · #**4879** Posted **Oct 16, 2008, 9:52 AM**

The Vdara sign doesn't look that bad

http://www.citycenter.com/vision/vis...struction.aspx

Bruce911 · #**4880** Posted **Oct 16, 2008, 10:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenratboy

With all due respect, that article was miserable:

"The Atlantis may renovate its casino and hotel while the Peppermill may add a tower. The key to Reno's rebirth might be Station Casinos, which owns sites near the Reno-Sparks Convention Center in southern Reno, across from The Summit shopping mall."

1.) Peppermill has already built and opened the new tower
2.) The convention center is not South Reno
3.) The convention is 8 MILES AWAY from the Summit Sierra
4.) The site Station owns is across from the Summit Sierra, and it would be worth mentioning that is where Bass Pro Shop was proposed

I think that pretty much throws out any merit the article has (not attacking it because I want to pretend things are going well, as they are very slow/depressed).

Sadly, I fear it is not only the article that lacks merit, it is also the response above. When you go to the article, you should note that it is dated three months ago. Even at that time, construction was already underway at both the Atlantis and the Peppermill.

However, the Reno-Sparks Convention Center most definitely is in southern Reno, and the Summit Sierra is also in southern Reno, at the very southernmost extreme, in fact, just across the street from the proposed Station location. The convention center is six miles from the Summit Sierra, not eight. "Near" is a subjective word, neither specific nor quantifiable. But all three locations discussed are definitely in the southern part of Reno.

So, Statement 1.) is true. Statements 2.) & 3.) are incorrect. The first part of Statement 4.) is true, but the last part is irrelevant as to the accuracy of the article, or to it being called miserable. Thus, the entry above is actually no more accurate than the article it is responding to. Which is more miserable? Dealer's choice.