Buried halfway down a Las Vegas Review-Journal story about the faltering fortunes of Harrah's Entertainment is this stop-the-presses revelation: "the company could sell some of its unused property in Las Vegas or Macau or even halt construction on the Caesars Palace project, which will cost the company $500 million in 2009 to complete." CFO Jonathan Halkyard also threatens to cut back on maintenance.

You read that right. Harrah's is publicly floating the prospect of selling some its 125 undeveloped acres in Las Vegas (many obtained at considerable cost) or its 175-acre golf course in Macao. Since Harrah's can't build a casino there -- and neither can anyone else now -- it's become a white elephant. Good luck getting your $578 million back, guys.

Still, this might explain why Harrah's highlighted its raw-land inventory in a Deutsche Bank presentation that was brought to my attention a few days ago. (And which has languished while I've worked on other projects.)

Suspending the Caesars expansion, slated to open next summer, would be blockbuster news, if it happens. While projects like the addition of a pedestrian bridge at Paris-Las Vegas have been put on hold, the Caesars augmentation has been one of the few to get green-lit. Halting it in mid-stream would send a powerful distress signal ... and leave the company with a prominent eyesore.

What the story doesn't mention is the most recent wave of economy measures at Harrah's Las Vegas properties. Paris closed its poker room on Oct. 10. One restaurant in The Rio (Antonio's) has shut down and another (Sao Paulo) has shortened its hours.

Halkyard also ticks off $2.5 billion in interest payments, expansions and maintenance costs that Harrah's can finance out of its $2.7 billion cash flow -- but neglects to include the company's Kansas casino. So it looks like that'll have to be bankrolled out of the $2 billion "rainy day fund."

The elephant in the middle of the room is a $2.8 billion (plus interest) unsatisfied court judgment against Harrah's. To be technical, it's against Harrah's precursor Park Place Entertainment, and CEO Gary Loveman inherited it when he orchestrated a Harrah's buyout of PPE/Caesars Entertainment. The ruling is on appeal but it's a contingency for which Harrah's must brace itself.

Did anybody think any of this through before Harrah's lumbered itself with almost $18 billion in LBO debt? And is it too soon to call for Gary Loveman's resignation?