It was simply a word... yet I never told you.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Q22:Will the Government be sharing the outcome of the RFC exercise with the public/media?
Ans:To safeguard our competitive interests and to protect the uniqueness of ideas and concepts of potential investors, we cannot disclose details of the RFC plans. Any information, if released, would be on an aggregated basis.

Labels: xunwei

ShAnNoN [6:13 AM]

Q21:Will the presence of a casino lead to an increase in law and order problems?
Ans:The government has conducted study visits overseas and our law enforcement counterparts in other jurisdictions, such as Nevada, Australia and UK, have informed us that with a robust and stringent regulatory regime, casino-related crime can be kept under control. This is also borne out by findings that there is no relationship between crime and legalised gaming. In fact, the 2000 Public Sector Gaming Study Commission suggested that casinos are more of a crime deterrent than an instigator because the security on the premises of gambling facilities, the multiple layers of regulatory control and the economic and social benefits are effective deterrents to criminal activity.The New Jersey Control Commission also reported that in Atlantic City, the adjusted crime rate actually decreased from 69.9 per 1,000 visitors in 1977, to 52.6 in 1996. This was remarkable considering that the number of visitors increased by 400% during that period.For Singapore, we will put in place stringent regulatory controls such as imposing a tight licensing and screening regime for operators, and measures against money laundering, vice and illegal money lending. These would be similar to those imposed in leading gaming jurisdictions around the world which have successfully kept casino-related law and order problems under control.

Labels: shannon n zhijun

ShAnNoN [6:11 AM]

Q19:What is the rationale of prohibiting casino advertising on local mass media?
Ans:Currently, we restrict gambling advertising in the local mass media in a manner similar to smoking and tobacco. The same treatment would apply to casinos. The intention is to prevent glamourising gambling and inducing people to gamble.

Q20:What is the purpose of patron education on gambling?
Ans:The purpose is to educate the public about the risks of problem gambling and where help can be obtained, as in the case for consumption of alcohol and tobacco. These measures would raise awareness among gamblers on the signs and consequences of problem gambling and encourage responsible gambling behaviour. Public awareness on problem gambling also empowers friends and relatives of individuals at risk of problem gambling to seek help for the gambler. Training for casino employees will enable them to identify patrons who show obvious signs of problem gambling and refer them for help.Jurisdictions in the US like Nevada require casinos to display information on problem gambling and help services in the gaming areas. They also have to implement staff training on problem gambling.

Labels: joey

ShAnNoN [6:10 AM]

Q18:What is the purpose of having a system of voluntary loss-limits?
Ans:A voluntary loss-limit system is a consumer protection measure which allows casino patrons to voluntarily set a gambling budget or limit their losses up-front in order to avoid over-gambling and chasing of losses. This system can be implemented with smart-card technology. Such a system has been put in place in the Crown Casino in Melbourne for its gaming machine patrons.

Labels: zhijun

ShAnNoN [6:09 AM]

Q17:What is the rationale behind prohibiting casinos to extend credit to Singapore residents?
Ans:This prevents Singaporeans from gambling on their future earnings or beyond their means. It is an extension of our current policy of not allowing existing gambling operators (i.e. Singapore Pools and Singapore Turf Club) to issue credit. Australian casinos are prohibited by statute from extending credit to residents.

Labels: shannon

ShAnNoN [6:08 AM]

Q16:What is self-exclusion? Is it effective in reducing problem gambling?
Ans:Self-exclusion provides a person who is at risk of developing problem gambling the opportunity to voluntarily exclude himself from the casino. The self-identified problem gambler can then abstain from gambling, and seek assistance to control his problem. Self-exclusion policies are also in place in US and Australia.Exclusion by a close family member allows family members to request exclusion of a problem gambler from the casino. This empowers a family that is adversely affected by a problem gambler to seek assistance in curbing the problem behaviour of the gambler.We will also ask operators to implement consumer protection measures such as staff training on problem gambling identification and a system to allow gamblers to voluntarily specify loss limits upfront to reduce the risks of excessive gambling.

Labels: kelly

ShAnNoN [6:07 AM]

Q15:Why is the minimum age at 21 years old higher than the minimum age of 18 years old for other legal gambling activities (e.g. lotteries, sports betting, horse racing, fruit machines in clubs)?
Ans:It would be prudent to set a higher minimum age for casino gambling to protect the young. Casino gaming involves table games and jackpot machines, which are characterised by rapid play, high re-staking rates and instant gratification. These characteristics make casino gambling appealing to the young. A higher minimum age also protects young persons whom research has shown to be more susceptible to problem gambling.

Labels: xunwei

ShAnNoN [6:06 AM]

Q14:Why not prohibit local participation entirely?
Ans:Singaporeans are mature and should be entrusted to make responsible decisions. The vast majority are not predisposed to developing problem gambling. The social safeguards should thus not be a blanket ban on all local participation.

Labels: kelly

ShAnNoN [6:05 AM]

Q13:Why should admission to the casino by Singapore residents be restricted by membership? Is the $100 levy a sufficient deterrent?
Ans:The objective of having membership requirements on Singapore residents is to underscore the point that gambling is not and will never be a way to earn a living. Instead it is an expense which they should think over carefully before participating in. Admission requirements also reduce impulse gambling. A higher levy will not be more effective in deterring problem gamblers because they can easily go to Batam instead (where round trip travelling expenses are less than $50).

Labels: zhijun

ShAnNoN [6:04 AM]

Q12:Studies have found that casinos have a negative social impact on the community around them. Doesn't this clearly state the case against having an IR?
Ans:The social impact of casinos has been studied widely with varying results. There is no conclusive proof of the link between casino gaming per se and social costs such as bankruptcies, fraud and embezzlement, as evidenced in the seminal studies on the effects of gambling by the US National Opinion Research Centre (NORC) and National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC). NORC's 1998 analysis of data on 100 communities between 1980 and 1997 showed no significant change in per capita bankruptcy rates in communities where casinos were introduced. Empirically, the NGISC report also reached no conclusions on whether gambling increased fraud occurrences in the general population. Please refer to Annex A for more details.The Australian Productivity Commission on the other hand, highlighted that the main causal factor of problem gambling was not the casinos, but the proliferation of Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) in the community. Among the major gambling forms, gaming machines and lottery products were the most accessible. Casinos came last. The study identified a correlation between states with higher access to EGMs and the prevalence of problem gambling. For example, Victoria and New South Wales, which both had the widest spread of EGMs especially in clubs, also had the highest prevalence rates of problem gambling. By contrast, Western Australia, which had banned EGMs (other than in Perth's Burswood Casino), had the lowest prevalence rate.As Singapore's context may differ from the Australian and US experience, neither the NGISC's nor the APC's estimates would be a conclusive gauge for Singapore.Any cost benefit analysis should focus only on the incremental change. More than $6 billion are already being wagered every year by Singaporeans in local betting outlets. An estimated US$900 million is gambled away by Singaporeans in casinos around the world. These figures do not include Internet gambling by locals. Clearly, there would already be a significant baseline social cost associated with this group, regardless of whether the IR is built or not. The cost we should be concerned with should therefore be the incremental social cost associated with new local gamblers. If the impact of the IR is largely drawn from the existing pool of punters while attracting few new local gamblers, the incremental cost of an IR would be limited.

Labels: joey

ShAnNoN [6:04 AM]

Q11:The Government is overstating the economic case for casinos. Won't casinos cannibalise and damage surrounding hotels, entertainment venues or convention facilities?
Ans:Not all casinos are integrated resorts. The type of integrated resort we are looking for is one that will attract more international visitors and grow the tourism pie. This will grow the economic opportunities for other businesses. The case study of Atlantis in the Bahamas is instructive. A few years after Kerzner International transformed Atlantis in the Bahamas into a destination resort in 1995, visitor arrivals increased. Tourism expenditure steadily increased to US$1.67 billion by 2000, compared to about US$1.33 billion in 1994, and the revenue per available room night also increased sharply over the years from US$43 to US$138 over the same period. Other properties, following Kerzner's successful example, began to upgrade. The total number of completed construction projects also increased significantly, peaking at US$512 million in 1998. (See figure 4 below).

Labels: shannon

ShAnNoN [6:03 AM]

Q10:Casinos rely on local clientele to survive. Crown casino, for instance, relies mainly on local patrons. Why should we believe investors who say otherwise?

Ans:There are different IR models and not all IRs are the same. For example, the Venetian in Las Vegas is significantly different from Crown Casino or the gambling halls in Macau. The IR we envision in Singapore is similar to those in Las Vegas and the Bahamas. We envision a distinctive world-class development with a comprehensive range of amenities such as hotels, convention facilities, entertainment shows, theme attractions, luxury retail and fine dining. Different products attract different clientele. This is revealed by the revenue sources of the various casinos. Crown Casino derives more than half of its revenue (about 70%) from gaming, unlike the Venetian or Atlantis where gaming makes up 43% and 26% of the total revenue respectively. Please refer to Figure 3 below. In addition, Crown Casino's clientele is predominantly locals, as compared to the Venetian and Atlantis which attract a significant number of tourists. The key is to ensure that we have the right IR development.

Labels: xunwei

ShAnNoN [6:02 AM]

Q9:Casinos only attract gamblers. Why does the Government want to attract gamblers? Are we sure we can attract many gamblers to Singapore?

Ans: Our aim is to target tourists and overseas visitors, not gamblers. Depending on the product offerings of the IR, the type of customers can vary widely. Las Vegas and Atlantic City are two foremost destinations in the US with casinos. However, they attract very different types of customers. Las Vegas offers a wide range of iconic destination resorts, whereas Atlantic City has smaller gaming establishments with limited world-class amenities. In a study of visitors to these two cities, almost 90% of visitors to Atlantic City state that they visit primarily to gamble. In contrast, only 5% of visitors to Las Vegas in 2003 do so because of gaming. Please refer to figure 1 below. Another example is in Bahamas. Casinos have been legal prior to 1994 when Kerzner International transformed Atlantis in the Bahamas into a destination resort. The example of Bahamas prior to 1994 show that having casinos to attract gamblers will not work in boosting the tourism industry. What is needed is a world-class resort. This is what Kerzner did in 1995, and revenue per available room night (RevPAR) rose sharply from US$43 in 1994 to US$201 in 2003. In addition, hotel occupancy rose from below 65% in 1993 to a healthy 80% in 2003. Please refer to figure 2 below.

Labels: joey oh

ShAnNoN [6:01 AM]

Q8:Our tourism industry has managed perfectly well without a casino so far. Is it necessary to make gambling a key part of our tourism strategy?
Ans:The IR project is one of the strategies that Singapore is pursuing to boost its tourism appeal and generate economic growth. The Singapore Tourism Board is actively working on many other tourism initiatives such as branding, marketing, capability development, as well as developing new attractions, pursuing new market segments and streamlining regulations. Whilst our tourism strategies are not dependent on the IR alone, it is an important project that can significantly enable Singapore to capture our fair share of the growing Asia-Pacific tourism pie.

Labels: kelly

ShAnNoN [6:00 AM]

Question 7: What kind of public consultation has been conducted so far?
Ans: The government consulted widely and considered all views before arriving at a decision. We appreciate the significant number of feedback that has been given through emails, letters and the forum pages. In addition, the Feedback Unit organised dialogue sessions with various stakeholders (e.g. religious groups, grassroots leaders, business community) to understand their concerns and gather their views and suggestions.

Labels: shannon

ShAnNoN [5:58 AM]

Q6: Studies have found that casinos have a negative social impact on the community around them. Doesn't this clearly state the case against having an IR?
Ans: The social impact of casinos has been studied widely with varying results. There is no conclusive proof of the link between casino gaming per se and social costs such as bankruptcies, fraud and embezzlement, as evidenced in the seminal studies on the effects of gambling by the US National Opinion Research Centre (NORC) and National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC). NORC's 1998 analysis of data on 100 communities between 1980 and 1997 showed no significant change in per capita bankruptcy rates in communities where casinos were introduced. Empirically, the NGISC report also reached no conclusions on whether gambling increased fraud occurrences in the general population.The Australian Productivity Commission on the other hand, highlighted that the main causal factor of problem gambling was not the casinos, but the proliferation of Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) in the community. Among the major gambling forms, gaming machines and lottery products were the most accessible. Casinos came last. The study identified a correlation between states with higher access to EGMs and the prevalence of problem gambling. For example, Victoria and New South Wales, which both had the widest spread of EGMs especially in clubs, also had the highest prevalence rates of problem gambling. By contrast, Western Australia, which had banned EGMs (other than in Perth's Burswood Casino), had the lowest prevalence rate.As Singapore's context may differ from the Australian and US experience, neither the NGISC's nor the APC's estimates would be a conclusive gauge for Singapore.Any cost benefit analysis should focus only on the incremental change. More than $6 billion are already being wagered every year by Singaporeans in local betting outlets. An estimated US$900 million is gambled away by Singaporeans in casinos around the world. These figures do not include Internet gambling by locals. Clearly, there would already be a significant baseline social cost associated with this group, regardless of whether the IR is built or not. The cost we should be concerned with should therefore be the incremental social cost associated with new local gamblers. If the impact of the IR is largely drawn from the existing pool of punters while attracting few new local gamblers, the incremental cost of an IR would be limited.

Labels: zhijun

ShAnNoN [5:57 AM]

Q5:Why can't we focus our efforts on other engines of growth?

Ans:Let our tourism industry carry on as it is and focus our efforts elsewhere.Our external environment has changed significantly. To grow and prosper, Singapore needs to adopt a multi-pronged strategy to seize economic opportunities swiftly.The development of our tourism industry cannot be viewed in isolation from other sectors of our economy. Even as we continue growing Singapore as a healthcare, aviation and life sciences hub, we must enhance our entertainment quotient and destination appeal to leisure and business visitors and foreign talent. For example, our status as an aviation hub depends significantly on how attractive we are to overseas leisure and business visitors. The growth of our life sciences industry depends on our ability to attract foreign talent. Hence, our efforts in enhancing our tourism industry through projects such as the IR would have wide-ranging impact on other sectors of our economy.

Labels: xunwei

ShAnNoN [5:55 AM]

Q4:Can't we just have the Integrated Resort without the casino? Are there other alternatives to rejuvenate our tourism landscape?

Ans:Overseas experiences have shown that similar entertainment hubs may not be economically viable if we remove the casino component. This is because the gaming and non-gaming components in such complexes are interdependent. Revenue generated from the casino is used to cross-subsidise the other non-gaming attractions, which in turn attract the large number of visitors. These facilities leverage off each other and become viable because of the high volume of traffic drawn to the wide range of entertainment options available.One point that has been raised quite often is whether we can have a similar development, for example a mega theme park without the casino component. Any private sector developer of a mega theme park without casinos is more than welcome to participate when we request for concepts.Projects like Disney theme parks or the Guggenheim museum in Bilbao typically require a significant amount of Government co-investment. For instance, out of the total project cost of S$5.8 billion for Disneyworld, the Hong Kong Government is committing a total of S$4.8 billion to the project. The Guggenheim museum in Bilbao required the government to commit more than US$150 million - i.e. US$100 million went towards construction and US$50 million to develop the collection. This was topped off with US$20 million to the Guggenheim Foundation. This is unlike the IR which we are considering, which is expected to be privately funded.While our tourism strategy is not dependent on the IR project alone, the IR would play a very significant role in the overall strategy.

Labels: kelly

ShAnNoN [5:54 AM]

Q3:What are some of the expected economic benefits of the Integrated Resort?
Ans:Let us look at some examples of world-class integrated resorts overseas. Similar to these developments, we can expect the Integrated Resort in Singapore to attract more international visitors, increase our tourism receipts and boost our overall tourism industry. For example, in the Bahamas, hotel occupancy rose from below 65% in 1993 to a healthy 80% in 2003 after Kerzner International took over an ailing casino resort on the brink of bankruptcy and transformed it into Atlantis Resort. Atlantis was instrumental in turning the Bahamian tourism industry around. Kerzner also became the largest non-government employer, providing 8% of employment in the Bahamas. Las Vegas receives 35 million visitors a year. Reports indicate that 5.7mil of them are convention delegates, which is a lucrative market. It is the largest convention city in the US. 80% of visitors to Las Vegas were repeat visitors (Source: Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority). 65% of Bellagio's (one of the integrated resorts in Las Vegas) revenues are from non-gaming components (e.g. retail, dining, entertainment). These figures speak for themselves. The casino not only generates revenue, but also generates a buzz that brings more people to shops, restaurants, convention venues, entertainment venues and other attractions.

Labels: joey oh

ShAnNoN [5:52 AM]

Q2: What is the type of Integrated Resort we are considering?
Ans: We do not want a gambling hall in Singapore. We have studied various models that the Integrated Resort can take. The Integrated Resort that we envision in Singapore is an iconic destination resort that offers world-class entertainment and leisure facilities. Casino gaming is becoming widely available around the world and we have no intention of developing a gambling attraction to compete in the gambling market. The Integrated Resort in Singapore will not be like the gambling facilities in Macau or Australia (which mainly cater to local patrons). One possible model for Singapore is a premium, large scale development which takes advantage of beach and marina settings to create a truly get-away holiday feel for visitors. A themed mega-resort is a tourist destination in its own right. Sited away from the buzz of the city centre, it has a wide range of entertainment facilities such as hotels, restaurants, retail outlets, theatres, and themed attractions. The best example of this model is the Atlantis resort on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. Another possible model is one sited within the city as part of a high-intensity mixed-use development. The facilities usually include hotels, shopping, F&B, theme attractions as well as cultural amenities such as concert halls, theatres and museums. They add to the buzz and colour of the city. Examples are the urban integrated resorts in Las Vegas.

Labels: zhijun

ShAnNoN [5:48 AM]

Q1: Why are we considering an Integrated Resort?

Ans: The economic and tourism landscape in the region is changing very rapidly. The growth of the Asia Pacific outbound market, fuelled by the growing middle class in China, India, ASEAN, and the emergence of low cost airlines present significant opportunities. Many countries in the region are moving quickly to develop major tourist attractions and exciting tourism products. We need to respond and adapt to the increasingly competitive environment or we will gradually lose out on our tourism share.This is a key reason why we studied the feasibility of an Integrated Resort (IR). An IR will contribute significantly to Singapore's overall positioning as a premium must-visit destination offering a wide range of entertainment experiences for the leisure and business visitors. This resort will be part of a larger spectrum of tourism products we are developing to enhance our destination appeal.An IR will generate significant economic benefits for Singapore. First, the investments in IR developments are likely to be substantial. For example, US$1.6 billion was spent to develop the Bellagio in Las Vegas and US$2.4 billion will be spent to develop the upcoming Wynn Las Vegas resort. In addition, they create significant jobs and economic spin-offs. Second, IRs boost tourism receipts. Las Vegas, with a population of less than 2 million, attracts 36 million visitors each year. Las Vegas is the top convention city in the US and draws in many business travellers.We are mindful of the concerns regarding the potential social impact of a casino and hence have been studying the various issues carefully.
Back to top

Labels: shannon

ShAnNoN [5:47 AM]