• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Public Radio Sues to get Casino Revenue

M

MattParker

Last week, Pennsylvania Governor and sports talk host Ed Rendell went postal on 60 Minutes when Leslie Stahl had the temerity to suggest casino gambling to increase state revenue was exploiting gambling addicts and amounted to a regressive tax.

This week, the AP reports the non-profit organization which operates the local public radio and TV stations in Erie, PA (WQLN-FM 91.3) is suing to get a share of the proceeds from a casino in their area. The AP says the law legalizing casinos says regional arts and cultural attractions must get a piece of the action. Put another way: Slots players must subsidize museum and symphony goers. Now WQLN Media (aka Public Broadcasting of Northwest Pennsylvania Inc.) has gone to court saying arts and cultural attractions includes Car Talk and the News from Lake Wobegon. Tax money, pledges and corporate sponsors are not enough: They want a cut from the casino, too.

I bet public radio station managers who have a casino in their areas are watching this one, and rubbing their hands with anticipation.
 
MattParker said:
Last week, Pennsylvania Governor and sports talk host Ed Rendell went postal on 60 Minutes when Leslie Stahl had the temerity to suggest casino gambling to increase state revenue was exploiting gambling addicts and amounted to a regressive tax.

This week, the AP reports the non-profit organization which operates the local public radio and TV stations in Erie, PA (WQLN-FM 91.3) is suing to get a share of the proceeds from a casino in their area. The AP says the law legalizing casinos says regional arts and cultural attractions must get a piece of the action. Put another way: Slots players must subsidize museum and symphony goers. Now WQLN Media (aka Public Broadcasting of Northwest Pennsylvania Inc.) has gone to court saying arts and cultural attractions includes Car Talk and the News from Lake Wobegon. Tax money, pledges and corporate sponsors are not enough: They want a cut from the casino, too.

I bet public radio station managers who have a casino in their areas are watching this one, and rubbing their hands with anticipation.
Click to expand...

The people behind the people who are behind the people who are running the casinos won't allow that to happen. Capiche? You got a problem with that?
 
The people behind the people who are behind the people who are running the casinos won't allow that to happen. Capiche? You got a problem with that?
[/quote]

Do you mean the people you see in gangster movies or the people you see in Western movies?
 
MattParker said:
The AP says the law legalizing casinos says regional arts and cultural attractions must get a piece of the action. Put another way: Slots players must subsidize museum and symphony goers.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that. The Atlantic City casinos fund lots of things in NJ, including senior citizens buses and performing arts centers, and those things also get money from various state and non-profit agencies. These casinos are licenses to print money. And so they subsidize a lot of things no one else wants to pay for. If public broadcasting is one of those things, so be it. The other sources you mentioned are declining. Members and corporations are giving less. So this is a sin tax that benefits culture and education. We have lots of them.

By the way, the indian casinos fund lots of similar educational and cultural ventures on their own reservations. That includes tribal radio stations.
 
MattParker said:
Talk_Dude said:
The people behind the people who are behind the people who are running the casinos won't allow that to happen. Capiche? You got a problem with that?
Click to expand...

Do you mean the people you see in gangster movies or the people you see in Western movies?
Click to expand...

No, I mean the people I knew personally in Canonsburg, PA. Or the people I knew personally when I used to play the numbers. Or the people I knew personally when I would put a small bet on a football game.
 
I bet public radio station managers who have a casino in their areas are watching this one, and rubbing their hands with anticipation.
Click to expand...

Eh. Maybe, but probably not. Such deals like you describe are fairly rare; I don't recall CPR/CPTV getting anything specifically from Foxwoods or Mohegan Sun. Nor anyone in Syracuse/Utica getting anything from Turning Stone.

Tax money, pledges and corporate sponsors are not enough: They want a cut from the casino, too.
Click to expand...

You don't have to like casinos...you can even attack them; there's ample reason to. But if you're going to have to live with them no matter what you do, it's borderline irresponsible to NOT get your share of what little benefit they bring. Much like government funding, I suppose. ::)

As for who really runs casinos, I grew up 5 minutes from Foxwoods and was 16 when it opened. My high school was a half-mile from Mohegan Sun (although that opened right after I graduated). I worked as a summer dockhand where Skip Hayward (at the time, the tribal chairman of the Mashantuckets, owners of Foxwoods) kept his yacht. Not a "boat", that behemoth was a "yacht". Oh the stories I could tell...but only if I wanted to be fitted for concrete shoes off a pier at 3am. ;D
 
It would seem to me that the government entity in charge of the casinos would collect their share and distribute it as mandated. To take on the casino might be moving in the wrong direction, but to apply to the government entity would seem most logical. If the mandate is for the casino to support local arts, non-profits and the sort I would presume it is their choice of where the monies go. I'd work at building a relationship in lieu of waging war through the courts. I'd think the casinos have more money to allocate to legal defense unless this is simply a ploy to bring awareness to the situation.
 
bturner said:
It would seem to me that the government entity in charge of the casinos would collect their share and distribute it as mandated. To take on the casino might be moving in the wrong direction, but to apply to the government entity would seem most logical. If the mandate is for the casino to support local arts, non-profits and the sort I would presume it is their choice of where the monies go. I'd work at building a relationship in lieu of waging war through the courts. I'd think the casinos have more money to allocate to legal defense unless this is simply a ploy to bring awareness to the situation.
Click to expand...

According to the AP story, the entity in charge of distributing money is who the station is "taking on."
 
bturner said:
It would seem to me that the government entity in charge of the casinos would collect their share and distribute it as mandated. To take on the casino might be moving in the wrong direction, but to apply to the government entity would seem most logical. If the mandate is for the casino to support local arts, non-profits and the sort I would presume it is their choice of where the monies go. I'd work at building a relationship in lieu of waging war through the courts. I'd think the casinos have more money to allocate to legal defense unless this is simply a ploy to bring awareness to the situation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, right. The Pennsylvania government is such an honest entity, untainted by corruption or graft, and none of the elected officials or appointed bureaucrats have any ties or favors owed to anyone, anywhere.

BTW, are you interested in a great real estate deal? It seems the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale.
 
It would seem to me that the government entity in charge of the casinos would collect their share and distribute it as mandated. To take on the casino might be moving in the wrong direction, but to apply to the government entity would seem most logical.
Click to expand...

It's highly dependent on the specific situation. The money involved with casinos is simply mind-boggling; at one point Foxwoods was bringing in $7mil PER DAY just off the slot machines ALONE. And those were nowhere near as profitable as the card tables. That much money inherently corrupts everything it touches...the tribe, the local governments, the state government, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, etc etc etc.

It also means that "building a relationship" takes on a different meaning at this level. When you think you're gonna be earning about a million bucks, profit (not gross), PER HOUR...and it's 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year (and yes, it is)....well, you can afford to throw a lot of money around to get what you want. And usually what you want is to get your business operating as fast as possible and then you want to make sure there isn't a shred of negative publicity that might put any sort of dent in your revenue stream. For example, $1mil is a lot of money to a small non-profit...or a state senator in an election year...but it's chump change to a casino. So it's not uncommon to see a lot of hands out and a fire hose of cash aimed at those hands to get acquiescence as fast as possible.

That dynamic has changed somewhat as the economy's gone to hell and even casinos have felt the pinch. But it helps to remember what the default business approach is.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom