This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
1313


Emanuel Graça Editor-in-Chief


emanuel.graca@macaubusiness.com Make your mind up


THIS YEAR IS SET TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT SO far, politically, for chief executive Fernando Chui Sai On. There are several events that will de nitely in uence how people judge his performance. One of Mr Chui’s main headaches will be


deciding which casino operator or operators will be given the green light to break ground in Cotai. Nobody is expecting further delays to this decision. After more than three years of postponements, the government needs to take a stand on this matter this year, for several reasons. Sands Cotai Central will  nally open,


One of Fernando Chui Sai On’s main headaches for 2012 will be deciding which casino operator or operators will be given the green light to break ground in Cotai


ending the  rst stage of the development of Cotai. As the construction work  nishes, hun- dreds of construction workers will be out of a job and many subcontractors idle. There is a need for big new projects to keep them busy and avert social instability. The casino resort projects in Cotai still


awaiting government approval would do the trick. That is, unless of cials are expecting to use the laid-off construction workers and idle subcontractors to help build the light rail tran- sit system. Since the government has yet to present anything resembling a comprehensive employment policy, one can only guess. Keeping the building momentum going


in Cotai would also bene t Macau’s economic growth during a period of international  nan- cial and economic uncertainty. Although growth in gross domestic prod-


uct is driven by gross gaming revenue, the con- struction of casino resorts is a big contributor to gross  xed capital formation. It also pumps up inbound foreign direct investment. By failing to issue any casino construc-


tion permit in 2012, the government would be sending the wrong signal to casino operators and  nanciers, since of cials have already in- dicated that all casino concessionaires will be allowed a foothold in Cotai. With no schedule announced yet for the renewal of the gaming concessions – or clea r procedure for going about it – such a failure would only rattle


an industry already facing a high degree of uncertainty. Such a failure would also detract from the government’s international credibil- ity, which is already suspect because it lacks a clear strategy and  ip- ops in making policy for the gaming industry.


Grand  nalists The only question remaining then is: which casino operators will be authorised to break ground in Cotai in 2012? It is unlikely that all projects awaiting approval will be given the thumbs-up this year. The simultaneous con- struction of four or more mega-developments would not be feasible. All contenders have sound reasons to go


 rst. SJM Holdings Ltd. has built what is the city’s second-most recognisable landmark after the Ruins of Saint Paul’s – the Grand Lisboa. MGM China Holdings Ltd. can point out that the non-gaming expertise of its parent com- pany, MGM Resorts International, would bring added value to Cotai. Wynn Macau Ltd. may highlight that when its peninsula casino-hotel opened, it established new standards for the industry. Even Melco Crown Entertainment Ltd.,


already present in Cotai, can say to the govern- ment that when it acquired the majority stake in the Macau Studio City project it solved a tricky problem for of cials. It would be disap- pointed, to say the least, not to be authorised to undertake the project soon, gaming facili- ties and all. Adding more drama to the plot, Galaxy Entertainment Group Ltd. and Sands China Ltd. still have land in Cotai yet to be developed. Choosing which company should go  rst


will be far from easy. Whatever the govern- ment’s choice, it will be criticised. The only way to blunt the criticism is to ensure that the decision is properly explained and that the process is open to scrutiny. The past practice of suddenly publishing casino land grant contracts in the of cial gazette without a word of expla- nation is no longer acceptable.


DECEMBER 2011


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116