  Billk Member Username: Billk Post Number: 126 Registered: 09-2005 |
I thought the new MGM Grand Detroit casino was a big investment until I read this: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20071011/B IZ/710110322/1001 MGM Grand to build $5 billion, 3000-room mega casino in Atlantic City... | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1807 Registered: 10-2006 |
Atlantic City has for a long time been a big gaming town. Detroit is still the Las Vegas of the Midwest and unlikely to be 'trumped' by any other city soon. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1864 Registered: 04-2006 |
That looks nice. Better than any of their other current hotels, IMO. I wonder how that's gonna work out between Atlantic City and Philly when Philly tries to build their own casinos... (Message edited by iheartthed on October 12, 2007) | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 507 Registered: 02-2006 |
IMHO, Detroit would have gave Vegas and Atlantic a real good run for their money had all three casinos been built on the river. A cluster either on the east or west bank, would have made Detroit a destination on the river. <313> | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 1189 Registered: 11-2003 |
That's a huge development. AC is not even in the same market as Detroit. That project looks really nice. We are like the grade school of casinos and they are middle school and Vegas is College level. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 1190 Registered: 11-2003 |
It would have made so much more sense to have them all in one strip. Could you imagine the riverfront casinos connecting the river front via river walk? That whole section could have been a destination. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 221 Registered: 09-2007 |
Why didn't they build the Casinos on the river again? I believe the Atlantic City Casinos are along a Boardwalk or Pier or something. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2921 Registered: 06-2004 |
"I believe the Atlantic City Casinos are along a Boardwalk or Pier or something" and the rest of the city is nothing but a pit no way should our casinos have taken up the riverfront - it helps the city more the way they are now WE DO NOT WANT TO BE A GAMBLING MECCA we need diversity - solid steady fundamental businesses alongside the sports & entertainment draws | ||
Fjw718 Member Username: Fjw718 Post Number: 125 Registered: 11-2005 |
Has anyone ever been to AC? Depressing town.....alot of parallels to Detroit.....i think 4 of the last 8 mayors are in jail or something. And how about that mayor, he could give Kwame a run for the money. Lies that he was a vietnam Green Beret to steal VA benefits, then walks out of his office one day and checks into rehab. | ||
Timeless Member Username: Timeless Post Number: 6 Registered: 09-2007 |
People at the casinos wouldn't be able to enjoy the riverfront views the way residents will. By spreading out the casinos we are encouraging development in between them, and while casino goers hop from one casino to the next, hopefully they'll engage with all of the other great things the city has to offer. | ||
Iaintgotnostyle Member Username: Iaintgotnostyle Post Number: 30 Registered: 10-2007 |
I been to AC numerous times and you are correct FJW, it is an absolute shithole once you get off of the boardwalk. Shame, so much money in that tiny city but yet the poorest people inhabiting it. Locating the casinos on the riverfront is a bad idea. Once Detroit bounces back, that riverfront is prime for ultra luxurious condo developments with views overlooking Canada and Detroit. Putting Casinos there would basically drive business away further from the few downtown merchants left . Kepep all the business cluttered together away from the riverfront and save that prime real estate for your new homes . | ||
Lefty2 Member Username: Lefty2 Post Number: 325 Registered: 07-2007 |
I'd like to get that cement contract | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 1066 Registered: 10-2003 |
The difference is that in AC, the casinos are the economy. In the D, the Casinos add to an existing business infrastructure. The casinos, and Detroit and Jen Jen's great tax sucking machine will all do fine with the casinos being built up where they are now. | ||
Ramcharger Member Username: Ramcharger Post Number: 473 Registered: 05-2006 |
quote: If the casinos had been located on the Riverfront, anyone who could afford the price of a hotel room for a night could have enjoyed the view. Now you will have to buy a 1/2 million dollar condominium to enjoy the view. Besides, why do you think people wouldn't want to live near the casinos? All the new casino resorts being built in Las Vegas have hugely successful residential components. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 2393 Registered: 06-2006 |
There are good things about having the casinos both where they are and on the river... when you balance the positives, I really think the city got it right...if we had out them on the river, the riverfront would have been a cool spot but it wouldn't help development in the rest of the city... Also, if this casino thing works out the way we want it o, then I think it's highly like that Detroit will add another 2 or 3 casino at some point in the next 10-15 years, and when they do, who know...maybe those can be built along the river someplace... the property east of the ren cen is not the only riverfront property that isn't being used for anything...the land between riverfront towers and the ambassador bridge would be a prime spot | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1866 Registered: 04-2006 |
then walks out of his office one day and checks into rehab. He went to rehab? The last I heard, nobody could find him... ETA: You're right. From what I hear, that's a mess of a government that even Detroit has yet to ever experience. (Message edited by iheartthed on October 13, 2007) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5508 Registered: 08-2004 |
Ramcharger, you forgot about the Marriott at the RenCen. They have spectacular views!  | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 237 Registered: 09-2007 |
Gistok, I believe that was the City of Detroit and Marriot's attempt. Besides, they're technically within the CBD. The Casinos would have been outside the CBD. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5511 Registered: 08-2004 |
... he said "on the Riverfront"... and part of the CBD is on the Riverfront. I don't follow you about the "City of Detroit and Marriott's attempt". That hotel opened in 1977 as a WESTIN and only converted to Marriott in recent years. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 238 Registered: 09-2007 |
Well whatever brand it was, they must have wanted it on the river. I didn't get your point either though. You said this hotel chain is on the river, but we're talking about Hotel/Casinos and Permanent residential units. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5513 Registered: 08-2004 |
Urbanize... he's talking about a riverfront view... you can get that from the Ren Cen hotel. And you can get a riverfront view from the many apartments along the Gold Coast (those apartment buildings between the Belle Isle bridge and Manoogian Mansion) or from those apartments in Harbortown, or even from the Omni Hotel on the river. There are plenty of places to get a riverfront view without having casinos/hotels in Rivertown. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 240 Registered: 09-2007 |
Ok, but that's a totally different issue. We're talking about whether or not having Casinos on the river are good or bad development choices. I do get your point, the view is nice from any type of development. However, how would have the riverfront been like today if the casinos decided to build there instead of scattered about Downtown? Are you saying that residential units are better there than Casinos along the river? How do you figure this though? The Casinos would have spurred more residential development quicker anyway with all the vacant land along the river. | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 3063 Registered: 10-2003 |
The Casinos are fine where they are. The Riverfront is developing just fine without them, and they can help out other parts of the city. My two cents. | ||
Kslice Member Username: Kslice Post Number: 179 Registered: 04-2007 |
I, for one, don't want Detroit to become a AC or Vegas. I think our 3 casinos should be enough to bring people from Ohio and Indiana without turning our city into a gambling town. One casino on the river would have been good just to show Windsor we're still better. :D | ||
Dhugger Member Username: Dhugger Post Number: 217 Registered: 03-2005 |
Reminds me of the massive hotel in Dubai.  | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2934 Registered: 06-2004 |
Riverfront locations and views are wasted on casino guests - they aren't there to look out the windows or walk around the city. Once in the hotel a lot of them probably don't even leave until it's time to go home or they're out of money. | ||
Lefty2 Member Username: Lefty2 Post Number: 357 Registered: 07-2007 |
Atlantic City sucks outside the casinos, like Rosarito Beach Mexico, right outside the "strip" it is like a war zone. The proponents said that the taxes on casinos would do WONDERS for the area. LIES. It still is shit outside the casinos and the people just took the money an Ran as far as I can see. Just another bunch if political bullshit lies. The only one making out is the Guvment, and casinos and workers. | ||
Billk Member Username: Billk Post Number: 130 Registered: 09-2005 |
The plan to put the casinos on the river fell through because the landowners asked for too much money, and the city couldn't afford to buy the land. By the way that photo above looks like a massive sunk ship. |
