Yesterday, Minister Vivian Balakrishnan released some startling statistics. According to media reports, more 1 million visits to the casino have been made by Singaporeans in the past 7 months.
Based on these numbers, it is obvious that the bulk of the record profits reported by the casinos are being earned from Singaporeans rather than foreigners.
As an immediate stop gap measure, the Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) has issued directives to stop the casino from engaging in activities that encourage Singaporeans to visit the casinos. These include free shuttle rides to the casinos and media releases that showcase big winnings by gamblers.
In the longer run, it is obvious that these stop gap measures will have only a limited impact . There are more than 1 million visits to the casino in the past 7 months are made by Singaporeans. It appears the exiting levy ($100 per 24 hours and $2000 per year) is NOT having the desired effect of deterring Singaporeans from visiting the casino.
WILL THE LEVY BE RAISED AFTER THE ELECTIONS ARE OVER?
If there are no plans to raise the levy, Minister Balakrishnan should state this clearly.
If the number of Singaporean gamblers continues to surge and we start seeing a large number of broken families due to problem gambling, we can then hold Minister Balakrishnan accountable for having failed to manage the social problems of the casinos.
I am also interested to know some of the unpublished figures to determine the extend of the impact of Casinos on Singaporeans:
1) What is the total number of visits by foreigners to the casinos within the same period of time? This figure is important for us to assess on whether these casinos are “successful” in attracting MORE foreigners than Singaporeans. The KPI for this success is for every local Singaporean patrons, the casinos should attract 4 foreign patrons (20-80 ratio).
2) I would like to know the number of Singaporean who have signed up the $2000 yearly membership. On top of that, I also want to know the breakdown of the number of visits by Singaporeans, including those holding the $2000 membership. Eg. How many visited the Casino only once in the 7 months. How many visited twice, three times, four times…. etc. This is to determine the social impact of the Casinos on Singaporeans.
I believe MCYS has all these data and it is time to do a review on the casinos.
There are still problems of Casinos providing rolling credits (Casino operators basically turn into money lenders!) and not stating clearly the odds of each different games. But I guess we will have to do it one at a time as it seems that Minister Balakrishnan may not be able to cope with too many things simultaneously.
Goh Meng Seng
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
They will release only if the stats back them. Why would they tell the public that they are screwing local?
The whole media will only play support to the gov and publish articles and stats to please and back their masters.
I dont think they will release such sensitive data to public or to anyone.
Maybe we should ask the ministers to declare their overall assets or their discretionary bonuses. Would they? ha ha ha
GMS said that based on the numbers, it is obvious that the bulk of the record profits reported by the casinos are being earned from Singaporeans rather than foreigners.
Then, he contradicts himself by openly asking the Minister for the total number of visits by foreigners to the casinos. He said that this figure is important to “assess on whether these casinos are “successful” in attracting MORE foreigners than Singaporeans.”
If he did not hold these important data in the first place, how did he come to the earlier conclusion that bulk of the record profits are being earned from Singaporeans rather than foreigners?
I suppose this is the type of wild conjecture we have come to expect from some Opposition leaders of this calibre – grasping at straws when they don’t even know whether those are straws.
My other comments to this article is here:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=425535&fbid=157116444314784&op=1&view=all&subj=444173978976&aid=-1&auser=0&oid=444173978976&id=100000492883350
obviously the $100/$2000 levy is not effective. I asked my manager (he paid $2000) whether he will still visit the casino if
1) there is no annual levy and
2) daily levy is increased to $500.
His reply was "Yes".
By the way, he visits the casino on average about 3 days every week.
Post a Comment