Las Vegas Boom, Bust, Innovative, Enigmatic Or A Colossal Failure In 20-Years?

[Marcus Allen]

Just wondering about what are your collective thoughts concerning "sin city". Will it continue to grow or die out within the next generation? Thoughts about it's faux architectural venue? In other words, what relevance will this urban center have in say 2100?

[nativehoustonion]

The last I heard they are tearing down the Fontainebleau Resort Hotel.  It is 63 floors and 735 feet.  It has been sitting there empty for years.  The city wants to tear it down and sell it for scrap metal.  What a shame. 

[brian0123]

I went to Vegas one time and vowed it would be my last. Places like Macau will continue to grow and suck business from them. States will allow more gambling over time as well. Add to that water shortages and I'll give Vegas as we know it 50 years. Really, I think the nail in Vegas' coffin will be when Texas allows gambling  (maybe in 20 years?). Galveston would see a surge in casinos (someone will probably even create a Balinese Room #2).

[arche_757]

Water, or lack thereof rather, will ultimately limit Las Vegas' growth and prosperity.  Besides, their economic model is largely based on tourism and that is a really tough segment of the economy to base a thriving city off of.

 

I think post-Baby Boomer America will watch cities like Phoenix, Miami, Vegas (who have large Baby Boomer populations) suffer somewhat due to that.

 

Vegas will dry up and die if LA ever allows gambling.  I know that the lobby from Nevada is very strong against that, but if California and Texas ever move towards allowing open gambling all around places like Vegas will shrink.

Honestly, I see Vegas as the Detroit of the 2000s.  Maybe without the riots, but it will shrink and look very odd in 2099.

[Montrose1100]

Water, or lack thereof rather, will ultimately limit Las Vegas' growth and prosperity.  Besides, their economic model is largely based on tourism and that is a really tough segment of the economy to base a thriving city off of.

 

I think post-Baby Boomer America will watch cities like Phoenix, Miami, Vegas (who have large Baby Boomer populations) suffer somewhat due to that.

 

Vegas will dry up and die if LA ever allows gambling.  I know that the lobby from Nevada is very strong against that, but if California and Texas ever move towards allowing open gambling all around places like Vegas will shrink.

Honestly, I see Vegas as the Detroit of the 2000s.  Maybe without the riots, but it will shrink and look very odd in 2099.

Vegas will always be a destination. I had an absolute blast going there for a friend's bachelor party. Even if Texas opens up to gambling, it won't be Vegas suffering, it will be Louisiana and perhaps Oklahoma (depending on if it's only allowed on Galveston).

 

Vegas has history and there is a ton of stuff to do there besides gambling. It's also a huge family destination.

[arche_757]

I don't agree.  Vegas is built on fake.  It is fake.  It has prospered (like many other desert sub belt cities) due ot the influx of retirees from colder climates.  Those retirees are from the Baby Boomer generation or the generations before and I don't see Gen-X or Millinials moving to places like Vegas when water shortages (see Lake Powell and just how low it is) will cause rapid stagnation of those "booming" economies.

 

Don't get me wrong, Vegas may be nice, but I don't see their model of city building as realistic.

 

Here in Texas we will have the same problems with water and growth.  But in Houston we'll be able to eventually desalinate and produce potable water from the Gulf, rather than rely on the Trinity, Colorado and Brazos rivers.

[Montrose1100]

I don't agree.  Vegas is built on fake.  It is fake.  It has prospered (like many other desert sub belt cities) due ot the influx of retirees from colder climates.  Those retirees are from the Baby Boomer generation or the generations before and I don't see Gen-X or Millinials moving to places like Vegas when water shortages (see Lake Powell and just how low it is) will cause rapid stagnation of those "booming" economies.

 

Don't get me wrong, Vegas may be nice, but I don't see their model of city building as realistic.

 

Here in Texas we will have the same problems with water and growth.  But in Houston we'll be able to eventually desalinate and produce potable water from the Gulf, rather than rely on the Trinity, Colorado and Brazos rivers.

Of course it's fake. So is the castle in Disney World, but people still go.

 

I agree with you that the city it's self will experience very slow growth once they reach their peak water supply. However, it will still be a major tourist destination. If Galveston opened up to gambling they would get a couple 2nd rate casinos and hotels like Atlantic City, nothing as glamours or drawing like the super hotels in Vegas. Vegas would not turn into Detroit, it would be the huge casinos in Louisiana that would. Coushatta, Delta Downs, and the casinos in Lake Charles would be empty. 

 

In fact I would hope Galveston got at least 2nd rate hotels. They could get complete garbage like Gulf Port, Mississippi.

[arche_757]

You think a suburb of the 4th largest city in the country would have garbage hotels and casinos like Gulf Port, Mississippi (which is in the poorest state in the country) and close to Mobile, which is the 120th largest city in the country.  I don't.  I think it would be a construction boom and while you wouldn't have the Bellagio, you would have nice hotels, and nice casinos.

 

Vegas is already past peak water.  Detroit might be an extreme example... Akron?  Buffalo?  Something more like that.  Still viable, smaller, less growth, but still nice enough for those who live there.  But it won't be able to sustain the current level of growth.

 

Also, while Vegas does attract lots and lots of people from around the country, lets don't obscure the fact that Los Angeles feeds a very healthy percentage of Vegas' tourists from out of state.

 

I think we both agree about the same thing, but to slightly lesser degrees.

[Montrose1100]

You think a suburb of the 4th largest city in the country would have garbage hotels and casinos like Gulf Port, Mississippi (which is in the poorest state in the country) and close to Mobile, which is the 120th largest city in the country.  I don't.  I think it would be a construction boom and while you wouldn't have the Bellagio, you would have nice hotels, and nice casinos.

 

Vegas is already past peak water.  Detroit might be an extreme example... Akron?  Buffalo?  Something more like that.  Still viable, smaller, less growth, but still nice enough for those who live there.  But it won't be able to sustain the current level of growth.

 

Also, while Vegas does attract lots and lots of people from around the country, lets don't obscure the fact that Los Angeles feeds a very healthy percentage of Vegas' tourists from out of state.

 

I think we both agree about the same thing, but to slightly lesser degrees.

26% is a very healthy percentage.

 

But compare the estimated $4 billion that Texans spend on gambling out of state. $3.8 billion of that is spent in Las Vegas. Those are 2007 figures so forgive the old data.

 

http://www.texas-gaming-association.com/topics/texans-are-paying-to-improve-other-states/

 

What I'm saying is that the Casinos will always thrive in Vegas, regardless if Galveston opens up shop or not.

 

Edit: So basically the city might lose population but will always be the center of gaming entertainment in the country.

[arche_757]

I agree.  I'm saying that Vegas will not maintain its current level of growth unless it greatly diversifies its business model.  The city *could* have outstanding health care, education and other sectors thrive, but it doesn't.  And part of my point was that *IF* Texas and California were to legalize gambling that would be detrimental to Nevada.  Not all Houstonians, Los Angelenos, Dallasites, San Franciscans would stop traveling to Vegas, but it would probably take at least 30-40% of the citizens who wanted to go gamble and keep them closer to home?  That loss of revenue would be significant.

 

I don't ever think it will poof - just go away - just diminish in size and importance.

 

Note: The word denoting people from Dallas contains the word "ites"  as in paras-ite?  I just found that... telling.

[Naviguessor]

Fertitta, Fertitta, Fertifta and more Tilman Fertita, if Galveston opens to Gambling.  Tilman has been getting into the Gambling biz specifically so when Galveston (& Texas) does open...he will be there firstest with the mostest.  I guess this may be what "2nd Rate" may mean...in that there is not likely to be any Aria, Wynn or Bellagio there right away.  More Like Golden Nugget.  However, I bet he would amp it up a bit.  But, that always makes me nervous when He does that.    

[editor]

I went to Las Vegas for the first time this year, and much to my surprise I really really enjoyed it.  So much so that I was thrilled when I got to go again a couple of months later.  It's not the sort of place that someone like me should like, but I really did.  

 

That said, I think Las Vegas has reached its maximum potential for a long while.  Housing is massively overbuilt. Water continues to be a problem.

 

But the city's leaders seem to understand that the world is changing and they're changing the city, too.  A huge effort is being put into revitalizing downtown, from new casinos to new restaurants, to new residential developments.  Even *gasp* office space!

 

The old Las Vegas City Hall is now the Zappos headquarters, and the city is making a big effort to support home-grown dot-coms ("Silicon Desert" seems so redundant).  The regional is also making a huge play into renewable energy.  New solar farms and solar furnaces are going up, along with turbines.  After all, if there's two things Las Vegas has it's sun and wind.  Plus its proximity to big California energy infrastructure points like Palm Springs and Bakersfield make exporting the energy cheap and easy.

Las Vegas seems to be trying to turn itself not into a "bigger" city, but into a "better" city, by making full use of what it has.  

Even though people have been predicting for a decade that it will be made irrelevant by Macau, let me tell you -- I've been to Macau.  That's not a fun flight in coach.  And if you're flying first class, then you're headed to Monte Carlo instead.   I think the fact that a Malaysian company recently bought one of the dead Strip resorts and is rebuilding it as a massive Chinese gambling paradise is an indication that Las Vegas is still an international draw.  Another indication is to just look at the number and variety of airlines that land at McCarren.  Pretty much every serious global carrier goes there.  They wouldn't if there wasn't a reason.

After all, Americans can easily go to Disney World or Disneyland, but they still show up at Disneyland Paris.  Heck, even I've been to Disneyworld Hong Kong and Tokyo DisneySea, even though an American Disney park would be much cheaper.

[editor]

Fertitta, Fertitta, Fertifta and more Tilman Fertita, if Galveston opens to Gambling.  Tilman has been getting into the Gambling biz specifically so when Galveston (& Texas) does open...he will be there firstest with the mostest.  I guess this may be what "2nd Rate" may mean...in that there is not likely to be any Aria, Wynn or Bellagio there right away.  More Like Golden Nugget.  However, I bet he would amp it up a bit.  But, that always makes me nervous when He does that.    

 

Since he already owns the Golden Nugget, "Golden Nugget Galveston" would seem to be a lock.  I stayed at the Golden Nugget, and it was fine.  It was no Vdara, but it was a brazillion times better than the Flamingo.  You might even call it "average."

 

I've always found it ironic that there's no gambling in Texas, because when I think of cowboys, I imagine them in a dusty saloon playing poker.  But that's a different thread.

[ToryGattis]

I can't predict what the gambling industry will do, but I think Vegas will always thrive as a retirement mecca for Californians.  They can cash out of their massively overpriced CA home, buy a much cheaper one in Vegas, and bank the spread for retirement - all while still remaining within a day's drive of their kids and grandkids (Phoenix has the same appeal).  Also no income tax in Nevada.

[arche_757]

Yet California, Arizona and Nevada are all future (if not somewhat already) future water problems waiting to happen.  A desert cannot sustain a city without any viable/long-term source of water of 2-3 million, much less 2 of them (counting Vegas and Phoenix).  LA is the reason places like Hoover Dam and Lake Powell exist, and the reason there are aquaducts/pipes moving water across those miles of parched earth.  LA isn't shrinking (but I suppose a catastrophic earthquake could cause some population losses due to people losing homes and businesses?), so that water issue will continue to plague the desert cities of the West.  Not to mention the water useage in the Central Valley...

 

I see Vegas and Phoenix suffering in the future due to water restrictions.  Will people want to live there when water restrictions are as draconian as measures given to Australia a few years ago (families were limited on how many gallons they could use - for all activities including bathing, eating and flushing).  While we in Houston have access to large amounts of rainfall and can use the ocean if need be (so can LA for that matter) Phoenix and Vegas cannot.  Collecting rainfall there is as laughable as collecting snowfall here for the same purpose.

 

Point being - Vegas may never dry up because gaming builds elsewhere, but it and Phoenix face very real, very daunting tasks of supplying their populations with water.  There is only so much water the Colorado River can supply (and its already at a critical juncture).  I think in 100 years there will be books about the folly of Vegas and Pheonix and how our "Screw the natural way of things" 20th century selves created cities where only towns could realistically exist.

[Marcus Allen]

Thank you to all the constructive comments. I like it when intelligent conversation is free of trolling. A fresh relief. I will try to think of some more "fun to discuss" topics.

[Marcus Allen]

Thanks to all of you, I have my new topic. Will post soon.